Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google Science

Creationists Manipulating Search Results 445

Posted by Soulskill from the pi-is-exactly-3 dept.
reallocate writes: It looks like some Creationists are manipulating search results to ensure websites pushing religion are appearing in response to queries about science. Ask Google "What happened to the dinosaurs?" and you'll see links to Creationist sites right at the top. (And, right now, several hits to sites taking note of it.) Google has a feedback link waiting for you to use it.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Creationists Manipulating Search Results More

Creationists Manipulating Search Results

Comments Filter:

  • "What happened to the dinosaurs?" (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @08:04PM (#49778787)

    The answer is that they're still here, SEO-ing the search results.

    Dinosaurs, the ones related to lizards, can be traced through the fossil record to a number of extinction events.

    Dinosaurs, the ones related to creationism, can be traced through the search results to the pages they've tweaked for rankings.

    • Re:"What happened to the dinosaurs?" (Score:5, Funny)

      by Applehu Akbar ( 2968043 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @10:54PM (#49779649)

      As they call it, intelligently designing the search results.

    • Re:"What happened to the dinosaurs?" (Score:5, Informative)

      by ArmoredDragon ( 3450605 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @11:46PM (#49779845)

      Dinosaurs, the ones related to lizards

      Uhh...wut? Just because they looked like overgrown lizards in Jurassic Park, doesn't mean they're related to lizards.

      Here's Jur ass has had it Park's raptor:

      http://jurassicpark.wikia.com/... [wikia.com]

      Here's what a raptor probably looked like IRL:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      Now what modern animal does the likely IRL version of a raptor resemble? If you guessed lizard, then I'm sorry.

      • BTW that post sounds kind of mean spirited to the OP in retrospect, which isn't intended, I'm just poking fun at creationist websites claiming that dinosaurs espousing the idea that "god let lizards live a long time so they grew big" which isn't supported by the fossil record.

  • Alternate story title (Score:5, Insightful)

    by amicusNYCL ( 1538833 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @08:05PM (#49778793)

    "Everyone trying to manipulate search results"

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by v1 ( 525388 )

      "Everyone trying to manipulate search results"

      Though just because "everyone else is doing it" doesn't make it right. This particular one is just something more people would like to see action taken on.

      (I won't shed a single tear for scientologists gettting a slashdot effect)

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by msauve ( 701917 )
        "Though just because "everyone else is doing it"..."

        To paraphrase Yossarian, "Then, I'd certainly be a damned fool to do it any other way, wouldn't I?"

    • "Everyone trying to manipulate search results"

      Yep. Don't like it? Use duckduckgo.com. Meh. A non-story.

    • Re:Alternate story title (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @09:54PM (#49779369)

      SEO/Marketing Asshole here:

      This is slightly different than your typical manipulation in that Google is showing the result outside of the typical organic results. Google has been pulling in 'facts' under its Knowledge Graph program to return 'factual' information for common search terms (a common example is the generic name for name-brand medicine).

      Having read the patent that describes the Knowledge Graph they're suppose to validate any 'facts' with Wikipedia and other trusted data sources before returning those 'facts' in the Knowledge Graph.

      This is a serious fuck up on Google's part if jerks like Ham can get his stupid book and obviously-wrong facts into the Knowledge Graph. In reality the story should be about Google getting played not more focus on made-up bullshit that people made up to rectify the bible with science.

      • Re:Alternate story title (Score:5, Interesting)

        by im_thatoneguy ( 819432 ) on Wednesday May 27, 2015 @01:05AM (#49780101)

        Bing returns the same results so unless both knowledge graphs are operating the same I would imagine it's a much simpler explanation: both sites rely on "answer" websites for answers. If you ask any question most often the results are Yahoo.Answers, Answers.com and wikihow. My guess would be that "Answers in Genesis" overloads their weighting for "answers" URLs associated with "Questions" on this topic.

        If they actually overloaded the Knowledge Graph it would appear in a special box at the top of the results. In this instance it's still just a link. If you search "Circumference of the earth" you'll get a knowledge graph result with an "official answer".

    • Yep. But christians are supposedly not supposed to lie. SEO of that sort is a form of lying.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by bledri ( 1283728 )

        Yep. But christians are supposedly not supposed to lie. SEO of that sort is a form of lying.

        Many "modern" Christians believe that it's OK to lie if your goal is to convert the people to Christianity. After all, there is only one "Truth."

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Maritz ( 1829006 )
        The list of what christians are 'supposed' to do but do not do is astonishing. If you take the whole book, then even the crazy ones are hellbound hypocrites. Show me a preacher who doesn't trim the hair on the side of his head for example (expressly fucking forbidden in Leviticus). Even if you take it forward to the 'nice' nutter, JC - he gave pretty specific instructions that NO-ONE pays any attention to.

  • One web site. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Geoffrey.landis ( 926948 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @08:10PM (#49778823) Homepage

    The actual article seems to only say that one web site, titled "What really happened to the dinosaurs", appears in response to one particular search query, "What happened to the dinosaurs".

    That's annoying and stupid... but it's not the same as the hyped headline "creationists manipulating results."

    • Re:One web site. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Joe Gillian ( 3683399 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @08:21PM (#49778915)

      I think the fear is more that kids will see this stuff while doing research for school (especially in earlier grades where they don't necessarily know better) and take it for granted. I had a professor in college who showed me a site that popped up when searching for information about the civil rights movement and Martin Luther King, Jr. that was actually run by a racist group, which contained blatantly false information. As I recall, it appeared near the top of Google results at the time, but this was five or six years ago.

      I think this kind of stuff should remain up, though. There's the free speech issue, but I think it's a really good way to teach kids how to find proper sources of information.

      • this is an old tactic.

        a long time ago, i picked up a random book in the library about the Aktion T4 program and read it while i should have been writing my thesis. it was interesting enough, until the last two chapters which ranted about how, obviously, pro-choicers were pushing America down the same path. it was annoying, but a nice reminder; i had to fact-check everything i read. i did, and the facts about T4 checked out, which suggests that they just took some legitimate research and bolted their drivel [barnesandnoble.com]

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Blymie ( 231220 )

        Exactly. In this day and age, kids MUST learn to filter.

    • Wow, thanks for the query. It has all kinds of entertaining [tumblr.com] things [wordpress.com] to see [readeroffictions.com] [last link is barely sfw].

  • This is a surprise? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by epyT-R ( 613989 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @08:12PM (#49778843)

    I'm sure every ideologue out there wanting to brand their dogmatic bullshit as truth is doing the same thing.

    • Like the OP?

  • That what it seems to be from TFS:

    Ask Google "What happened to the dinosaurs?" and you'll see links to Creationist sites right at the top."

  • It's kinda cute (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @08:14PM (#49778861)

    Their zeal to push their bullshit in a vain attempt to still appear relevant. Kinda like dinosaurs in a tar pit... how fitting.

    Maybe someone should tell them that nobody outside the US even remotely takes that "controversy" serious? I do not know a single politician outside the US who would think that even remotely considering pushing an agenda as harebrained as creationism is anything but political suicide. Hell, even our ultra-conservatives would not even touch that shit with a 10 foot pole, knowing that they'd be looked at like they just claimed the tooth fairy existed.

    • Re:It's kinda cute (Score:4, Insightful)

      by the gnat ( 153162 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @09:49PM (#49779343)

      nobody outside the US even remotely takes that "controversy" serious

      Hell, most scientists inside the US don't take the "controversy" seriously, or even notice it most of the time. The only reason most of us care is because those fuckwits keep trying to legislate their mythology into the public schools, otherwise they'd be worth no more thought than, say, flat-earthers or faith healers. And in large parts of the country, e.g. liberal urban areas like the one I live in, it's not even an issue in schools either. (God knows our public schools have enough other problems...)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jmv ( 93421 )

      I do not know a single politician outside the US who would think that even remotely considering pushing an agenda as harebrained as creationism is anything but political suicide. ...well, except in Canada these days. A couple years ago, our minister of *science* was refusing to answer questions about whether he believed in evolution [www.cbc.ca]. More recently, Alberta also had a creationist minister of education. [nationalpost.com]. So unfortunately, some of the madness has escaped North of the US.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Xtifr ( 1323 )

      Maybe someone should tell them that nobody outside the US even remotely takes that "controversy" serious?

      I don't know if you realize this, but "outside the US" is an area that contains countries which are not among the developed nations, and in poor countries with limited access to schools and low literacy rates, a lot of people do take the controversy seriously. Heck, Turkey, which is actually part of the EU, has a ever-so-slightly higher rate of evolution-rejectionism than even the US does. (Although it's the only country in the EU with more anti-science idiots than the US.) :)

      Brazil also seems to have a lot

  • Suppose a Christian search term was hijacked? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Required Snark ( 1702878 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @08:23PM (#49778935)
    Just imagine that a common simple search phrase referring to Christ had as it's first result a Satanist site?

    It would be a major national news story. There would be editorials in news outlets large and small. Fox News and the right wing press would call it a terrorist act. There would be hearings in Congress, and calls for laws protecting religion. It would be a three ring media circus.

    All truths are not created equal. Some points of view are more equal then others [wikipedia.org].

    • It would be weird, would it not? I would hope most news outlets would run that story.

      Congress would mandate search results? Hm.

      And if an act inspires terror in a populace, then it would be a terrorist's act, no?

      In any case, how you see a correlation worthy of note in a tale about the inevitable corrupting influence of power; well it makes me worry about you. :)

      • I did not say that any laws would be changed. I did not say it was an act of terrorism, but it would be compared to terrorism. I did not say that that search results would be mandated in any way.

        You did not read my post carefully. I said that there would be huge media frenzy, and that political opportunists would use it to whip up public opinion to their advantage.

        I wonder about your reading comprehension. You seem to know what most of the words mean, but do not seem to grasp the actual content of the sta

  • Comedy gold (Score:5, Funny)

    by NoNonAlphaCharsHere ( 2201864 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @08:49PM (#49779067)

    After the Flood, around 4,300 years ago, the remnant of the land animals, including dinosaurs, came off the Ark and lived in the present world, along with people. Because of sin, the judgments of the Curse and the Flood have greatly changed earth. Post-Flood climatic change, lack of food, disease, and manâ(TM)s activities caused many types of animals to become extinct. The dinosaurs, like many other creatures, died out. Why the big mystery about dinosaurs?

    C'mon guys. you just can't make that kind of shit up. There isn't enough weed on the planet for that. It must be divinely inspired.

    • 4300 years ago...

      I guess the Sixth Dynasty of Old Kingdom Egypt didn't notice they got washed away, and went on building their pyramids like nothing had happened.

      And Sargon must have clung to the side of the ark - or snuck on disguised as a dinosaur - so he could get back to building his empire as soon as the ground dried out.

      I reckon the author is better at manipulating reality than he is at manipulating search results.

    • I cannot bring myself to laugh at this. The thought that this was written and could be taken seriously is way too sobering.

  • I thought it was cosmetic, but deeply threaded discussions are really messed up as can be seen here [imgur.com].

    Posting in this discussion as it's both the most recent and a boring one.

  • Lisa Simpson... (Score:5, Funny)

    by jaredmauch ( 633928 ) <jared@puck.nether.net> on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @08:59PM (#49779111) Homepage

    "I find the defendant not guilty. As for Science versus Religion, I'm issuing a restraining order. Religion must stay 500 yards from Science at all times"

  • but i went and googled it and low and behold, there's the bogus creationalist CRAP as the first link. so i sent my feedback detailing how i just sat there and shook my head in disbelief ...
    • You can find out all kinds [google.com] of stuff from Google.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by vidnet ( 580068 )

      Obviously this is a grievous error which should be fixed, but I can definitely see how a machine learning system could pick up this answer as a false positive with no foul play*: extinction through biblical flood may be the most commonly held hypothesis in the US.

      42% of Americans [gallup.com] believe in creationism, and it's not unlikely that they'd all believe dinosaurs were killed in a flood.

      The other 58% could be split between asteroids, volcanos, continental drift, "other" and "don't know", with no single group havi

      • You sure there wasn't a big ass flood when that asteroid hit?

        It could be that their timing is just off. That would be far less stupid.

        I'm just sayin'.

      • Machine learning is hard even when you've got good input data. The internet is full of lies.

        Reminds me of the Siri clone, Isis - a program that was supposed to index knowledge, but assimilated a number of pro-life sites a bit too well. Queries about abortion or contraception were met with a long rambling monologue about sin, with a few insults thrown in against anyone who would consider such things.

  • Wait what? (Score:4, Funny)

    by cloud.pt ( 3412475 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @09:30PM (#49779247)
    Man, that first result BS is so deep, I'm even starting to believe it myself. They say dinossaurs were the big creatures from the genesis that got wiped out by Noah's flood. Then they go in to praise (what they deem as) good science for computers, electricity, junk food (yeah, they praised junk food. Honest.), and even space exploration. Then like a two-punch, they discredit all history-related kinds of sciences (even inventing new definitions of it), with arguments about them dealing with the past only with present facts, which makes some sense. But then I see this amazing quoted comparison...

    "Paleontology (the study of fossils) is much like politics: passions run high, and it’s easy to draw very different conclusions from the same set of facts." M. Lemonick, Parenthood, dino-style, Time, p. 48, January 8, 1996.

    And I felt just like waking up from a priest/pastor's best wet dream (sans pre-pubescent kids). Lord Baby Jesus. Fucking politics. I think I laughed for like 2 minutes straight like a nutcase. Imagine voting for your favorite paleontologist for the best excavation. Creationists have THE best comparisons ever. Period.

  • Creationism (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Murdoch5 ( 1563847 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @09:54PM (#49779365) Homepage
    If creationists want to be taken seriously they need to stop arguing science on points that aren't disputed.
    If creationists wants to be taken seriously they need to create a reason for God to exist, that doesn't fall back on weak, shallow, sad logic paradoxes which don't make sense.
    If creationists wants to be taken seriously, they need to prove aspects of there given religion.

    The problem is, no creationist has ever been able to do this, they always have to result to shallow, weak, sad and pathetic arguments, against topics they don't understand and using logic that doesn't work. Just saying a theory doesn't make sense, doesn't make it false and doesn't make valid controversy. You can't just radically claim that Dinosaurs don't exist and never once provide evidence of that, that isn't a separate view, it's just a wrong view until you have evidence. Creationism has become the new face of the uneducated adult, and the worst part about this is that it's being pushed onto kids. Creationism can't be taken seriously until it starts making serious, adult arguments. Just because a creationist is to scared to grow up and drop the security blanket, doesn't mean they have a point, they don't.

  • Manipulate all search results to relevent xkcd (Score:5, Funny)

    by jfdavis668 ( 1414919 ) on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @10:48PM (#49779627)
    We need to work together to manipulate all search results to lead to whichever xkcd is most relevant to the topic.

  • Bing did OK for me (Score:3)

    by mbone ( 558574 ) on Wednesday May 27, 2015 @12:07AM (#49779915)

    On Bing, my response to

    What happened to the dinosaurs?

    (no quotes) is pretty benign - pbs, wikipedia, and national geographic in that order, and then Answers in Genesis.org, followed by slate. Only 2 of the 8 links on the first response page are fundamentalist, the AIG site and a kiddie site. Finally, while I don't agree with Answers in Genesis, they are certainly not a stealth site, and I don't think it is objectionable just by itself that they in the mix.

    Of course, "Your results are personalized" so other people may get different responses.

Slashdot Top Deals

On the eighth day, God created FORTRAN.

Close