Remember when I said the mainstream media doesn’t want you to learn about climategate? Well they’re not alone. Apparently Google, a company known for its liberal agenda, censorship of conservatives, and blatant bias and favoritism doesn’t want you to know about it either.
Among the points of interest in the unfolding climate scandal is the fact that the term “climategate” rapidly eclipsed global warming in the number of links produced by a simple Google search.
As is standard, Google’s auto-suggest function facilitated this, several days into the story’s evolution. Anyone typing in the letters c-l-i would see the suggested time-saving choice of climategate. Within a day or two of the auto-suggest function being added for “climategate” it had become the top item in the list.
Suddenly, though, on Monday December 1, Google stopped offering “climategate” as a choice to those who typed c-l-i and even to those who typed c-l-i-m-a-t-e-g-a-t. Strange.
Intrigued, I sent a few questions to Google’s Global Communications Department and a polite gentleman by the name of Jake Hubert responded right away.
To make a long story short, he goes all the way up the chain until he gets to the CEO of Google, Eric Schmidt.
I decided then to try another e-mail to Eric Schmidt (Sorry about that, Jake!). In the meantime, I’d seen that Google searching “climategate” (if one was willing to type in the whole phrase) now produced 22 million links.
Dear Mr. Schmidt,
Thank you for following up with Jake Hubert, who has reached out to me by telephone.
Unfortunately, the explanation makes no more sense by phone than it did by e-mail.
Climategate generates 22 million links on the main Google search engine. Global warming, by comparison, generates fewer than 11 million.
The idea that a numbers-driven algorithm stopped Google Suggest from filling in Climategate is absurd on its face. (Google Suggest, as it should, continues to in-fill global warming when a user begins typing it.)
These are my questions for you and your staff:
1. Was Google contacted by Al Gore or any one of his business associates regarding climategate searches on Google? If so, when did the approach take place?
2. What was the process that led to the decision to remove Climategate from the Google Suggest function?
3. Will Climategate be added to the list of Google Suggest items again?
4. Does Google feel that it acted according to its own highest ethical principles in this matter?
Thank you in advance for your consideration.
I pushed send, got my daughter into her gymnastics gear, and rushed out the door. When I returned a little less than two hours later, I put my sleeping daughter on the couch and rushed upstairs to check my e-mail. Nada. Then I did a Google search, typing c-l-i-m … and there it was – offered by the gloriously user-friendly Google Suggest function – “climategate.”
You never know.
Was Google briefly complicit in the largest scientific scandal in at least a generation, attempting to minimize it behind the scenes? Like I said, you never, ever, ever, ever know. Ever.
P.S. Four hours after the function returned, Google Suggest on “climategate” was altered again. Instead of the single word “climategate,” which yields 27 million links per search, Google now offers “climate gate scandal,” which yields 6 million. Only by hand-typing the complete word “climategate,” to the last letter, can users view an additional 21 million links. The evident message from on high? “Tamp it down.” The apparent success of the strategy: close to non-existent.
P.P.S. As of six days after this post (today is Tuesday December 8), Google Suggest no longer offers any choices for C-l-i-m-a-t-e-g-a-t-e, no matter how many letters one types. The total number of links appears to be stable around 30 million. The first reader who finds any Google search with 30 million or more links that Google Suggest doesn’t assist with wins the prize.
Read the whole thing. As of this writing, climategate is not auto suggested at all. In fact, when I get to “climategat” the only two auto suggests are “climate guatemala” and “climate guatemala city.” I tried it as two separate words, and even after typing the whole thing out (”climate gate”) I’m only being suggested “climate gates.”
I’ve been keeping an eye on this throught the climategate scandal. For a couple days it was autosuggested but has since disappeared despite the 24,600,000 search results. Just for giggles, I typed in my own name (JR Salzman) just to see what would happen. I got to “JR Sal” before my name or “JR Salzman logrolling” was suggested. Which is funny considering a search brings up only 1,250,000 results (most of them irrelevant).
Now I realize that my name and climategate are completely unrelated, but it got me thinking. I am a peon in terms of searches. I have never had an entire year of searches on my name that add up to one day of the climategate scandal’s. Google trends will prove that because my results are so low I’m not even listed. So why auto suggest me and not climategate?
So then I thought, what if climategate is not showing up because there are more relevant autosuggested words in front of it? If that is the case then it should show up at “climatega-.” Every autosuggest after that starts with “climate gu-”
There is no logical reason why a word – with far more search results than many autocomplete words out there, a much more recent spike in searches, and a word that was autocompleted mere days ago – like climategate would suddenly disappear. Someone is fiddling. Its one thing if it had never autocompleted. Its another if it suddenly disappears.
As the old adage goes, follow the money. Google wouldn’t have anything to gain from the bogus science of global warming, would they?
Google will spend hundreds of millions of dollars to jumpstart alternative energy technology, cofounder Larry Page announced Tuesday. Google will focus efforts on solar thermal power, wind power, and enhanced geothermal systems, the company said in a statement.
Google plans to spend tens of millions of dollars in 2008, as the project hires engineers and energy experts. Capital expenditures on renewable energy projects will reach hundreds of millions of dollars, the company said.
OK, big deal. Whats wrong with being “green?”
Google Invests in Silver Spring; Expect More – “The search giant, which has been investing in startups through its philanthropy arm, has created a standard fund that will spend $100 million in 12 months.”
Wait a minute. Silver Spring? Why does that sound familiar? Oh yeah, its the same company Al Gore has heavily invested in and “advises.”
The company, Silver Spring Networks, produces hardware and software to make the electricity grid more efficient. It came to Mr. Gore’s firm, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, one of Silicon Valley’s top venture capital providers, looking for $75 million to expand its partnerships with utilities seeking to install millions of so-called smart meters in homes and businesses.
Mr. Gore and his partners decided to back the company, and in gratitude Silver Spring retained him and John Doerr, another Kleiner Perkins partner, as unpaid corporate advisers.
I know what you’re saying. Mere coincidence. But the article continues:
As a private citizen, Mr. Gore does not have to disclose his income or assets, as he did in his years in Congress and the White House. When he left government in early 2001, he listed assets of less than $2 million, including homes in suburban Washington and in Tennessee.
Since then, his net worth has skyrocketed, helped by timely investments in Apple and Google, profits from books and his movie, and scores of speeches for which he can be paid more than $100,000, although he often speaks at no charge.
Still not enough?
Al Gore has such a fortune in Google stock that he could easily fund his own campaign for the White House, Democratic insiders say.
Gore became a senior adviser to the Internet search engine back in February 2001, and is a close friend of CEO Dr. Eric Schmidt. Google shares went public in 2004, and the stock has soared from $85 a share to more than $400. Co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page are worth an estimated $11 billion each.
But of course, it doesn’t stop there. You just knew there was an Obama connection, didn’t you. I’m shamelessly ripping this off from Wikipedia so I dont have to link all the sources myself. (All citations are linked on Wikipedia)
Schmidt was an informal advisor to the Barack Obama presidential campaign and began campaigning the week of October 19, 2008, on behalf of the candidate . He had been mentioned as a possible candidate for the new Chief Technology Officer position which Obama created in his administration. . In announcing his endorsement for Obama, Schmidt jokingly said that with his $1.00 salary, he would be getting a tax cut . After Obama won, Schmidt was a member of President Obama’s transition advisory board. He proposed that the easiest way to solve all of the United States’ problems at once, at least in domestic policy, is by a stimulus program that rewards renewable energy and, over time, attempts to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy.
Looks like a whole lot of inconvienant truths. Time to look for an alternative to Google.