Sign a petition against creationism

[Duvelthehobbit666]

Google scholar is showing creationist articles. There is a petition to stop this. Link below.
http://www.gopetition.com/petition/42229.html

 

[ProcInc]

Shouldn't this be more general? i.e. removal of homeopathy etc?

 

[Prolescum]

I think it's more likely that a letter writing campaign would have more effect. Online petitions have about as much credibility as creationists and are dismissed just as regularly. If it really matters to people, a proper effort would make the difference in my view, and if it's important enough to matter, it's not really an effort...

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

Shouldn't this be more general? i.e. removal of homeopathy etc?

Next step I hope. Though I am not sure these show up on google scholar.

I think it's more likely that a letter writing campaign would have more effect. Online petitions have about as much credibility as creationists and are dismissed just as regularly. If it really matters to people, a proper effort would make the difference in my view, and if it's important enough to matter, it's not really an effort...

You need an existing email for the petition and you are required to give your name. You would be surprised how it works. And one letter is not going to affect what kind of articles show up on google scholar. And a petition where people go from house to house isn't going to work either because it is too much work and not everyone will sign it. This is in my opinion the best way to do it. People can post the link or email the link to the petition or post it on forums like I did and sign the petition. This is the best way to reach a large amount of people who are for the petition.

 

[Inferno]

This has already been covered by PZ Myers. He also said that he got a reply from google (or the people who made the petition?) and it's a "problem" in the algorithm.

Read me!

 

[Prolescum]

I think it's more likely that a letter writing campaign would have more effect. Online petitions have about as much credibility as creationists and are dismissed just as regularly. If it really matters to people, a proper effort would make the difference in my view, and if it's important enough to matter, it's not really an effort...

You need an existing email for the petition and you are required to give your name. You would be surprised how it works.

I would be surprised if it does work... I think you missed the point of my post.

And one letter is not going to affect what kind of articles show up on google scholar.

Yes, you've misunderstood my intention completely. I didn't say write a single letter.

And a petition where people go from house to house isn't going to work either because it is too much work and not everyone will sign it.

Eh?

This is in my opinion the best way to do it.

I get that, however, I disagree.

I suggested a letter writing campaign because a series of letters from concerned users and interested parties are more likely to have an effect than a petition signed by random people who may not use the service but have signed at the request of friends. Numbers are less convincing than astute and articulate will. Plus, I've only seen one online petition that has had any discernible effect on anything, and even then it was part of a larger attempt to put pressure on the organisation (the petition was to force a vote at the IGDA to remove someone from the board of directors - it was bloody).

I'm not saying all this dismissively, I agree with the intent, I just think it's completely the wrong way to go about it, particularly given the context.

People can post the link or email the link to the petition or post it on forums like I did and sign the petition. This is the best way to reach a large amount of people who are for the petition.

It is also the least effective way to convince an organisation of the seriousness of your issue.

I'm only trying to help, although I suspect that my advice will be ignored. Good luck.

This has already been covered by PZ Myers. He also said that he got a reply from google (or the people who made the petition?) and it's a "problem" in the algorithm.

Read me!

Oh well... :lol:

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

If you said earlier that you have seen online petitions fail, I would have reacted otherwise. I still think that petitions can do a lot to highlight problems. People wouldn't make petitions if they didn't care. Even though Google might not do anything about it, the problem is now highlighted. The petition might not have an effect but at least we know there is a problem now.

 

[kenandkids]

This has already been covered by PZ Myers. He also said that he got a reply from google (or the people who made the petition?) and it's a "problem" in the algorithm.

Read me!

Damn, beat me to it... lol

 

[Prolescum]

If you said earlier that you have seen online petitions fail, I would have reacted otherwise.

I pretty much did, mon ami.

... Online petitions have about as much credibility as creationists and are dismissed just as regularly ...

 

[lrkun]

Google scholar is showing creationist articles. There is a petition to stop this. Link below.
http://www.gopetition.com/petition/42229.html

It is too broad. They need to enumerate the particular creationist topics.

 

[Anonymous]

Google scholar is showing creationist articles. There is a petition to stop this. Link below.
http://www.gopetition.com/petition/42229.html

It is too broad. They need to enumerate the particular creationist topics.

I agree, credibility is at stake here, we need specific articles or this petition is going to be nothing but a waste of time.

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

If you said earlier that you have seen online petitions fail, I would have reacted otherwise.

I pretty much did, mon ami.

... Online petitions have about as much credibility as creationists and are dismissed just as regularly ...

Um, saying that the credibility of online petitions have the credibility of creationists is not the same as saying that you have personally seen petitions fail. Nowhere in that quote do you refer to yourself.

 

[Prolescum]

Not another semantics conversation! :lol:

Um, saying that the credibility of online petitions have the credibility of creationists is not the same as saying that you have personally seen petitions fail. Nowhere in that quote do you refer to yourself.

I intended to assert that I had borne witness with the affirmative ...and are dismissed just as regularly, hence the I pretty much did. I thought it seemed reasonably clear at the time, but I admit it's not really.

I'm going to have to start writing footnotes...

The British government has its own petition website that they regularly ignore if you're interested in that sort of thing.