Googlegate?

[ElNono]

Has it even crossed your minds that the suggestions might change depending on a mul ude of things like your geographic location, previous searches, etc, etc, etc?

[DarrinS]

Maybe it's a huge left-wing conspiracy to inconvenience conservatives by making them enter more specific search terms, but I'd wager it has more to do with page hits. A vocal minority of conservatives care about climate change, compared to an overwhelming majority of liberals. Given the population is basically split 50/50, libs win the higher proportion, and their news source of choice reflects it.

A vocal minority of conservatives care about climate change? I'd beg to differ.


Strangely enough, if you type in "climategate" you get over 31 million hits (no auto-suggest, even after typing in the whole word).

Contrast this with Googling "Tiger Woods" (you get the suggestion after typing "tig") which gets 13.3 million hits (with name in quotes).

It doesn't really add up if Google works as advertised.

[PixelPusher]

A vocal minority of conservatives care about climate change? I'd beg to differ.


Strangely enough, if you type in "climategate" you get over 31 million hits (no auto-suggest, even after typing in the whole word).

Contrast this with Googling "Tiger Woods" (you get the suggestion after typing "tig") which gets 13.3 million hits (with name in quotes).

It doesn't really add up if Google works as advertised.

Actually, it shows Google works perfectly. More people are typing "Tiger Woods" into the search bar than "Climategate", because far, far more Americans are interested in Tiger's affairs than climate change, pro or con.

...and more people have been googling "Tiger Woods" for the past decade.

[ElNono]

A vocal minority of conservatives care about climate change? I'd beg to differ.


Strangely enough, if you type in "climategate" you get over 31 million hits (no auto-suggest, even after typing in the whole word).

Contrast this with Googling "Tiger Woods" (you get the suggestion after typing "tig") which gets 13.3 million hits (with name in quotes).

It doesn't really add up if Google works as advertised.

Here's a historical and topographical breakdown of the climategate word search in Google:
http://www.google.com/insights/searc...y%201-m&cmpt=q

Unfortunately, Tiger Woods is indeed way more relevant...

http://www.google.com/insights/searc...&q=tiger+woods

[DarrinS]

Actually, it shows Google works perfectly. More people are typing "Tiger Woods" into the search bar than "Climategate", because far, far more Americans are interested in Tiger's affairs than climate change, pro or con.

...and more people have been googling "Tiger Woods" for the past decade.

And yet there are more than twice as many hits for climategate (only a couple of weeks old) than there are for Tiger Woods. You have pointed out the paradox. Thanks.

[DarrinS]

Here's a historical and topographical breakdown of the climategate word search in Google:
http://www.google.com/insights/searc...y%201-m&cmpt=q

That's pretty interesting. Thanks.

[PixelPusher]

And yet there are more than twice as many hits for climategate (only a couple of weeks old) than there are for Tiger Woods. You have pointed out the paradox. Thanks.

There's more hits because there's a load of obscure political blogs linking to each other. That isn't the same as pageview traffic though. There may be relatively fewer links to the Tiger Woods affair but there are more eyeballs looking that them.

[boutons_deux]

For all of you righties shilling for the corporate GW denier-gate, here's some Vast Right Wing/Corporate Conspiracy evidence



James Hoggan

Co-founder desmogblog.com
Posted: December 7, 2009 02:24 PM

The Oily Echo Machine Behind "Climategate"


The most vocal organizations around the University of East Anglia hacked email story (aka. "climategate") have been involved in a decade-plus campaign to delay action on climate change.

The goal of this campaign, which began around the time of the first Kyoto Protocol negotiations, was to assemble a group of like-minded "free-market" think tanks and pseudo-experts that would bring into question the scientific realities of climate change, create doubt with the public and politicians and effectively delay the introduction of clean energy policy in the United States.

It's no coincidence that the groups pushing this story the hardest have a long history of taking money from oil and coal companies to attack the conclusions made by climate scientists.

What I wouldn't do to have a few of these organizations private emails over the years!

Here's a few of the groups I'm talking about and a very brief background on their previous activities, as well as funding sources:

Center for a Constructive Tomorrow: owns and operate ClimateDepot.com, which has been a main clearinghouse for the right-wing climategate echo chamber. ClimateDepot.com is managed by Marc Morano, former aide to Republican Senator James Inhofe. CFACT has received grants from Exxon Mobil, Chevron, and well-known right-wing foundations like the Carthage Foundation and the Sarah Scaife Foundation.

American Enterprise Ins ute: Offered to pay "experts" $10,000 to write papers that countered the IPCC reports. AEI has received close to half a million from oil-giant ExxonMobil, former Exxon Chairman Lee Raymond sits on AEI's board of directors.

Media Research Center: run by Brett Bozell, this group also operates the popular right-wing blog, Newsbusters.org. The Media Research Center has received over $257,000 from oil-giant ExxonMobil since 1998.

Cato Ins ute: Is the main front group for the most prolific climate denier, Patrick Michaels. Cato is the second largest recipient of funding the foundations run by Koch Industries Inc. (the largest private energy company in the United States).

Heartland Ins ute: Organizes a "denier conference" every year for the past three years. Used to receive funding from ExxonMobil, still receive grants from tobacco companies and are also a major recipient of grants from the foundations run by Koch Industries Inc. (the largest private energy company in the United States).

Heritage Foundation: Heritage is massive and operates on about $50 million a year. They have received significant funding from ExxonMobil, Koch Industries and other fossil fuel companies.

National Center for Policy Analysis: the NCPA is a small, but very vocal Dallas, Texas-based freemarket think tank and has received over $540,900 from oil giant ExxonMobil since 1998.

Compe ive Enterprise Ins ute: The CEI is well-known for its public efforts to aggressively counter the scientific evidence for human-induced climate change, especially after their infamous set of television ads with the tag line "C02, We Call it Life." Since 1998, the CEI has received over $2 million in funding from oil-giant ExxonMobil.

While these are some of the most vocal, there are more. So please leave a comment below if you think there's anyone else who should be added to this list and we'll do the research.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-...tml?view=print

==========

As you dishonest jokers really thought anybody thought you were sincere, or that nobody knew what your game is.

Slimey corporate shills, every one of you (whether you realize it or not)

[DarrinS]

For all of you righties shilling for the corporate GW denier-gate, here's some Vast Right Wing/Corporate Conspiracy evidence



James Hoggan

Co-founder desmogblog.com
Posted: December 7, 2009 02:24 PM

The Oily Echo Machine Behind "Climategate"


The most vocal organizations around the University of East Anglia hacked email story (aka. "climategate") have been involved in a decade-plus campaign to delay action on climate change.

The goal of this campaign, which began around the time of the first Kyoto Protocol negotiations, was to assemble a group of like-minded "free-market" think tanks and pseudo-experts that would bring into question the scientific realities of climate change, create doubt with the public and politicians and effectively delay the introduction of clean energy policy in the United States.

It's no coincidence that the groups pushing this story the hardest have a long history of taking money from oil and coal companies to attack the conclusions made by climate scientists.

What I wouldn't do to have a few of these organizations private emails over the years!

Here's a few of the groups I'm talking about and a very brief background on their previous activities, as well as funding sources:

Center for a Constructive Tomorrow: owns and operate ClimateDepot.com, which has been a main clearinghouse for the right-wing climategate echo chamber. ClimateDepot.com is managed by Marc Morano, former aide to Republican Senator James Inhofe. CFACT has received grants from Exxon Mobil, Chevron, and well-known right-wing foundations like the Carthage Foundation and the Sarah Scaife Foundation.

American Enterprise Ins ute: Offered to pay "experts" $10,000 to write papers that countered the IPCC reports. AEI has received close to half a million from oil-giant ExxonMobil, former Exxon Chairman Lee Raymond sits on AEI's board of directors.

Media Research Center: run by Brett Bozell, this group also operates the popular right-wing blog, Newsbusters.org. The Media Research Center has received over $257,000 from oil-giant ExxonMobil since 1998.

Cato Ins ute: Is the main front group for the most prolific climate denier, Patrick Michaels. Cato is the second largest recipient of funding the foundations run by Koch Industries Inc. (the largest private energy company in the United States).

Heartland Ins ute: Organizes a "denier conference" every year for the past three years. Used to receive funding from ExxonMobil, still receive grants from tobacco companies and are also a major recipient of grants from the foundations run by Koch Industries Inc. (the largest private energy company in the United States).

Heritage Foundation: Heritage is massive and operates on about $50 million a year. They have received significant funding from ExxonMobil, Koch Industries and other fossil fuel companies.

National Center for Policy Analysis: the NCPA is a small, but very vocal Dallas, Texas-based freemarket think tank and has received over $540,900 from oil giant ExxonMobil since 1998.

Compe ive Enterprise Ins ute: The CEI is well-known for its public efforts to aggressively counter the scientific evidence for human-induced climate change, especially after their infamous set of television ads with the tag line "C02, We Call it Life." Since 1998, the CEI has received over $2 million in funding from oil-giant ExxonMobil.

While these are some of the most vocal, there are more. So please leave a comment below if you think there's anyone else who should be added to this list and we'll do the research.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-...tml?view=print

==========

As you dishonest jokers really thought anybody thought you were sincere, or that nobody knew what your game is.

Slimey corporate shills, every one of you (whether you realize it or not)

Did any of these people/groups hide or delete raw data?
Or try to control the peer-review process?
Or create crappy computer models that apply "very artificial corrections" or "fudge factors"?


As far as I know, Stephen McIntyre just a retired mathematician.

[spursncowboys]

For all of you righties shilling for the corporate GW denier-gate, here's some Vast Right Wing/Corporate Conspiracy evidence



James Hoggan

Co-founder desmogblog.com
Posted: December 7, 2009 02:24 PM

The Oily Echo Machine Behind "Climategate"


The most vocal organizations around the University of East Anglia hacked email story (aka. "climategate") have been involved in a decade-plus campaign to delay action on climate change.

The goal of this campaign, which began around the time of the first Kyoto Protocol negotiations, was to assemble a group of like-minded "free-market" think tanks and pseudo-experts that would bring into question the scientific realities of climate change, create doubt with the public and politicians and effectively delay the introduction of clean energy policy in the United States.

It's no coincidence that the groups pushing this story the hardest have a long history of taking money from oil and coal companies to attack the conclusions made by climate scientists.

What I wouldn't do to have a few of these organizations private emails over the years!

Here's a few of the groups I'm talking about and a very brief background on their previous activities, as well as funding sources:

Center for a Constructive Tomorrow: owns and operate ClimateDepot.com, which has been a main clearinghouse for the right-wing climategate echo chamber. ClimateDepot.com is managed by Marc Morano, former aide to Republican Senator James Inhofe. CFACT has received grants from Exxon Mobil, Chevron, and well-known right-wing foundations like the Carthage Foundation and the Sarah Scaife Foundation.

American Enterprise Ins ute: Offered to pay "experts" $10,000 to write papers that countered the IPCC reports. AEI has received close to half a million from oil-giant ExxonMobil, former Exxon Chairman Lee Raymond sits on AEI's board of directors.

Media Research Center: run by Brett Bozell, this group also operates the popular right-wing blog, Newsbusters.org. The Media Research Center has received over $257,000 from oil-giant ExxonMobil since 1998.

Cato Ins ute: Is the main front group for the most prolific climate denier, Patrick Michaels. Cato is the second largest recipient of funding the foundations run by Koch Industries Inc. (the largest private energy company in the United States).

Heartland Ins ute: Organizes a "denier conference" every year for the past three years. Used to receive funding from ExxonMobil, still receive grants from tobacco companies and are also a major recipient of grants from the foundations run by Koch Industries Inc. (the largest private energy company in the United States).

Heritage Foundation: Heritage is massive and operates on about $50 million a year. They have received significant funding from ExxonMobil, Koch Industries and other fossil fuel companies.

National Center for Policy Analysis: the NCPA is a small, but very vocal Dallas, Texas-based freemarket think tank and has received over $540,900 from oil giant ExxonMobil since 1998.

Compe ive Enterprise Ins ute: The CEI is well-known for its public efforts to aggressively counter the scientific evidence for human-induced climate change, especially after their infamous set of television ads with the tag line "C02, We Call it Life." Since 1998, the CEI has received over $2 million in funding from oil-giant ExxonMobil.

While these are some of the most vocal, there are more. So please leave a comment below if you think there's anyone else who should be added to this list and we'll do the research.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-...tml?view=print

==========

As you dishonest jokers really thought anybody thought you were sincere, or that nobody knew what your game is.

Slimey corporate shills, every one of you (whether you realize it or not)

Sweet, thanx for all the sites

[Wild Cobra]

So it is just a coincidence that huffpost gets on the page one of every type of search?

Google makes money by prioritizing search results. The Huff and Puff post must cut Google a monthly check.

[Mr. Peabody]

type it as one word or two and you get a crapload of hits. what's the beef? do ya'll give up after "climategat?"

I'm upset because I typed in "climate gait" and "clamato gate" and all I got were hits discussing shoes and tomato sauce recipes. Damn you Google!

[Nbadan]

The Huff and Puff post must cut Google a monthly check.

[Wild Cobra]

Dan, didn't you know? That's how Google makes their billions. Advertisements. Payment for priority service is part of their operating practice.

If the Huffington Post pops up mare often than others, there is a pretty good change they pay Google for advertisement.

[ChumpDumper]

So this is climategategate?

Dan, didn't you know? That's how Google makes their billions. Advertisements. Payment for priority service is part of their operating practice.

If the Huffington Post pops up mare often than others, there is a pretty good change they pay Google for advertisement.

Advertised links show up in....




....wait for it....



....the advertised links section.

So for climategategate, you are trying to make us believe that Google wants to avoid collecting money from advertisers like www.ClimateGatePe ion.com or www.FightCleanEnergySmears.org (with the link led Climategate Hoax) or www.noteviljustwrong.com (link le: Al Gore is Wrong).