Conservapedia

[Sparhafoc]

In conversation with someone, I went to search for 'methodological naturalism' to provide a web source.

The top result, the highlighted one, is from Conservapedia, an organisation hostile to methodological naturalism.

I've reported it to Google explaining that their highlighted result genetically contradicts Google, the internet, and computers, as well as all the other products of scientific inquiry, but I doubt that one person alone can impact the algorithms.

So how does one go about redressing this bullshit?

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

I did a search myself, and it appeared at number 4 on the list - here

I generally use Naturalism.org myself.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[Sparhafoc]

Greetings,

I did a search myself, and it appeared at number 4 on the list - here

I generally use Naturalism.org myself.

Kindest regards,

James

How and why would an algorithm think that I would want Conservapedia as my tailored highlighted video? :|

 

[ldmitruk]

Greetings,

I did a search myself, and it appeared at number 4 on the list - here

I generally use Naturalism.org myself.

Kindest regards,

James

How and why would an algorithm think that I would want Conservapedia as my tailored highlighted video? :|

You need to use the mind reading version of Google search. It's available at Google labs.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

About a year ago Answers in Genesis found a way to trick Google and have it say the earth was 6,000 years old when one asked Google for the age of the earth. Perhaps Conservapedia found away to do this as well. However, it coming up as fourth for Dragan Glas makes me think it has more to do with your previous search history and Google trying to tailer what it thinks you want based on your history. You have been looking at sources that dandan/leroy has provided after all.

 

[Sparhafoc]

About a year ago Answers in Genesis found a way to trick Google and have it say the earth was 6,000 years old when one asked Google for the age of the earth. Perhaps Conservapedia found away to do this as well. However, it coming up as fourth for Dragan Glas makes me think it has more to do with your previous search history and Google trying to tailer what it thinks you want based on your history. You have been looking at sources that dandan/leroy has provided after all.

Right, this is what I think has happened, fucking algorithms on the internet perpetuating anti-scientific bullshit echo-chambers.

It pisses me off; this is the Disinformation Age.

 

[WarK]

I tried https://duckduckgo.com

1. Wikipedia
2. Rationalwiki
3. Conservapedia

I sent them a feedback message.