Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Dot Matrix

Well, this is infuriating...

14 posts in this topic

Trying to do some research on NY State rock strata. This is what I got...

 

post-420821-0-68567600-1401157036.png

 

 

 

:angry:

 

EDIT: Hmm, maybe this is better suited for Members Metropolis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am confused... What is the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it the one site that's irking you? Exclude it. Search "kt boundary in ny -site:creation.com" Works with both Bing and Google.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am confused... What is the problem?

 

Doing a search for Rock Strata, and it's poisoned by Ken Ham idiocy.

 

Is it the one site that's irking you? Exclude it. Search "kt boundary in ny -site:creation.com"

 

I was trying to figure out how to do that. Thanks.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh, a creationist site?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've been Hammed

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doing a search for Rock Strata, and it's poisoned by Ken Ham idiocy.

It isn't the job of the search engine to censor its results. It is supposed to show you popular content based on your query... It is almost obvious that creationist content would rank highly... It is far more likely to be actively discussed...

 

If you want to search for factual information only you should be searching via fact focused indexes... This could be Wikipedia (of course, reliability of information is always an issue), Google Scholarly search, various academic databases... Or you just exclude the sites that you spot appearing when you aren't interested (as Max Norris suggested)...

 

It is your job to search in the right place or adjust your query accordingly ;)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't the job of the search engine to censor its results. It is supposed to show you popular content based on your query... It is almost obvious that creationist content would rank highly... It is far more likely to be actively discussed...

 

If you want to search for factual information only you should be searching via fact focused indexes... This could be Wikipedia (of course, reliability of information is always an issue), Google Scholarly search, various academic databases... Or you just exclude the sites that you spot appearing when you aren't interested (as Max Norris suggested)...

 

It is your job to search in the right place or adjust your query accordingly ;)

Right, but for the first and second results? It can't give me results for published research, anything of the sort? It has to throw me right into that junk? I know they don't censor, but to see that first before *actual factual information* is not right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By any chance are you using American Google and Bing?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, but for the first and second results? It can't give me results for published research, anything of the sort? It has to throw me right into that junk? I know they don't censor, but to see that first before *actual factual information* is not right.

Why isn't it? The sole reason Google rose to dominating search was their ability to accurately rank popular content for given queries... Google shows you what is linked to most often, not what is "factual" or "right"... That isn't its job...

 

It is obvious that Creationist content would rank higher on less popular queries. As it is likely to be more actively discussed... Just like in the "real world" people don't go around saying the sky is blue all the time, but if some people vehemently disagreed they would be more adept to do so (even if their disagreement isn't factual).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By any chance are you using American Google and Bing?

Yes.

 

 

Why isn't it? The sole reason Google rose to dominating search was their ability to accurately rank popular content for given queries... Google shows you what is linked to most often, not what is "factual" or "right"... That isn't its job...

 

It is obvious that Creationist content would rank higher on less popular queries. As it is likely to be more actively discussed... Just like in the "real world" people don't go around saying the sky is blue all the time, but if some people vehemently disagreed they would be more adept to do so (even if their disagreement isn't factual).

It would be nice if they didn't. If I really wanted to be part of the "controversy" idiot crowd, I'd search for Creationism, but I didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be nice if they didn't. If I really wanted to be part of the "controversy" idiot crowd, I'd search for Creationism, but I didn't.

Well, I'd argue expecting to see confirmation biased geared results makes you no better than the "idiot crowd"... But I'll skip that argument for today.

From what I hear, using Google while logged into your Google account they will give you "tailored" results... I don't know how this works in practice. I value my privacy too much to use any search engine in this manner and I prefer results that don't subject me to confirmation bias.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.

 

 

It would be nice if they didn't. If I really wanted to be part of the "controversy" idiot crowd, I'd search for Creationism, but I didn't.

Dot, I do not understand the problem. You searched for a topic, and the search engine provided you with results that were relevant to your search query. You don't have to like the results (I often don't), but the search engine did what it was supposed to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.