I’m not sure whether to laugh or not, but is this just one more reason to use Bing as a search engine without a climate agenda? Maybe we should make it the official search engine of climate skeptics worldwide?
Full story here
Details on the Google Science Communication Fellows program here
The big bucks backed effort rather reminds me of this “B” scifi movie:
What next? Will we get the finger?
Just in case you don’t know where the scene is from, it is the 1978 remake of “Inavsion of the Body Snatchers”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Still waiting for eadler’s response to my question at 5:05 pm above.
Google News is a good way to assess the probable market sentiment. They have loads of Huffington, none of WUWT. So i get to know what most market parcipitants will read.
I’m always ahead. 🙂
BTW: I have determined that if you google “climate blog” that WUWT comes up on the second page, while Climate Progress and Real Climate come up in the top five on the first page, despite them getting MUCH less traffic.
I would use Bing, except it could find sand at the beach. Those who do everything do nothing well. I can find information faster on Microsoft’s own website with Google than with Bing. How sad is that? If you want to protest, use Yahoo! And don’t click on Google’s ads.
By the way, what do I see at the top? “ads by google”. Also Google also owns Doubleclick ads.
Wade, there is nothing wrong with Google Ads as they are completely safe and produce much needed revenue for “free” websites.
Hm, IF say one were to set google as their home page and search for WUWT (only) everyday (or whenever they come here) and link to it from there, can anyone let me know if this has any results at all?
Startpage and duckduckgo, has WUWT as third and fourth.
Thanks to those that provided these search sites, not heard of them before, like ’em so far, booked and linked.
So Google is in cahoots with the climate change crowd. Wonder what kind of deal they made.
I tried to put a Google Earth placemark on Lake Korttajarvi where the Tiljander lacustrine sediment study was done. The one which Mann used upside down. They still haven’t put the placemark up.
For those interested, here are the coordinates:
62°19’56.33″N, 25°40’53.38″E
Yeah, searching for “climate blog” gets WUWT on page 2, but searching for “climate change”, WUWT is totally black listed from all results. Funny that. Any bets on how soon someone at Google gets around to blacklisting WUWT on “climate blog” too?
They don’t need “new media”. They need to come out of the shadows and debate the skeptics.
Google has a known bias. When Climategate was a hot topic, they blocked the word from “suggestions”.
Just removed Google from my bookmarks.
I’ll be using Bing, Yahoo, or whatever strikes my fancy.
I think Google’s gotten too big for its carbon footprint.
Google has been attacking privacy on the net and is now participating in the echo chamber effect formed by the mountains in the bay area. Of course it’s communications that’s the problem.
I found Google’s blatant bias hard to believe at first, because I’ve been a great admirer of their technology. But when you do a search on “global warming skeptic” and get hits from huffington.post ,desmog.blog and nary a hit on wattsupwiththat, then the bias is clear. I feel like shouting “Say it ain’t so, Sergey and Larry!”. Big mistake on their part hiring professional “suits” to run their company.
Smokey says:
March 18, 2011 at 5:05 pm
eadler, what search term did you use to find WUWT at the top of the page?
I tried “climate”, “global warming”, and “climate skeptics” [which improbably had Grist at the top of the page]. WUWT was nowhere to be found. Neither was Climate Audit.
It seems that there has been I change. I tried searching just now, and found to my surprise that WUWT has been blackballed. It wasn’t that way earlier today. Google’s formula always put WUWT near the top.
I guess this is their reaction to this latest WUWT blogpost, where there have been so many attacks by posters here on the integrity of Google, that they decided to blackball this web site totally. Do they have a right to do that? I don’t know, but it certainly is a good way to get back at those who have insulted and reviled them.
REPLY: …and you are apparently “OK” with this. Fascinating. As I said in a previous comment, you are seriously delusional. – Anthony
Today, the House voted to defund NPR and PBS.
I just dumped Google for Bing.
They all had it coming, dipping too heavily into the polluted political well.
Well, that does it. First they mess up their news page, and refuse to go back after thousands of complaints and nary a single compliment (http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/news/label?lid=06c20bed07a04da6&hl=en, see for instance the 6/30/2010 posting by Google employee Fred S–and the massive replies). Now this.
Google purports to be “objective.” Methinks not:
http://talkingabouttheweather.wordpress.com/2009/12/02/google-gate/
I got tired of having to fight all the cookies. I’ve moved to Duckduckgo as a search engine. It defaults to safe, so you have to tell it to look in the larger world, but I’ve found more papers and books on subjects of interest than I ever did with Google.
I worked for DEC back when AltaVista was THE search engine. Sad that it’s now so much about shilling.
eadler,
What’s your rationale for Google blackballing Climate Audit? Or the rest of the skeptic sites? “Global warming” has blogs like Wikipedia, the NY Times, the EPA, National Geographic, Climatehotmap, etc.
“Climate change” has pretty much the same cast of alarmist characters. No skeptics’ sites at all on the first page, the 2nd page, the 3rd page, etc. When I got to the minor, thinly trafficked blog realclimate on page 5, I gave up. Still no “Best Science” site WUWT, or CA, or any skeptic site on the first five pages. And as we all know, people almost never go past the first page or two.
Google is deliberately and with malice aforethought blackballing blogs on its “enemies list.” IMHO they should be forced to explain to a judge and jury why they’re deliberately trying to destroy these businesses. Think of the juicy pre-trial discovery and depositions! They could go on for months. And there wouldn’t be any Mann/Jones-style whitewashes:
“Your honor, please direct the witness to answer the question!”
Sw-e-e-e-e-e-t.
eadler says:
March 18, 2011 at 7:08 pm
“I guess this is their reaction to this latest WUWT blogpost, where there have been so many attacks by posters here on the integrity of Google, that they decided to blackball this web site totally. Do they have a right to do that?.”
Not if the adults find out.
wsbriggs, if you don’t want to “fight” cookies (standard HTTP cookies are harmless text files) then disable them in your browser. The only problem is this may break the functionality of some pages.
In regards to technology, I love using Google products. But I hate their politics. Remember when they kowtowed to Red China and censored their content? How about their ties to the Obama Administration? And don’t get me started on the privacy issues with Google.
Google is headquartered near San Francisco and I think they have to be liberal or they would be in violation of local zoning laws.
Before everyone gets hysterical over what is showing up in Google searches makes sure you are searching the page source of each result for the existence of search phrase.
For example,
Google Search – “climate blog”
Notice, what is highlighted in the results,
RealClimate – Accuweather Climate Blog
Climate Progress – [Page Source] alt=”Cover image of Joe Romm’s book, Straight Up: America’s Fiercest Climate Blogger”
WUWT – search phrase does not exist.
ect…
Nothing is being “blackballed”, Anthony has to add these key words to his site permanently to do better in those results. Google results are driven by the existence of key words, incoming link frequency and incoming link page rank.
How to make WUWT do better in Google Search Results,
1. Anthony needs to permanently add the key words to the main page he wishes to do rank higher on with Google searches.
2. More people need to link to WUWT from their own site.
3. More sites with a higher page rank need to link to WUWT.
For example; CNN linking to WUWT would have more effect than 20 poorly trafficked blogs. Regardless every incoming link helps.
Had a feeling this was coming after Google made a clumsy attempt at censoring or redirecting searches for “Climategate” when the news broke. Are we now looking at a newer, more polished version of Connelly/Wikipedia affair?