Use "SCROOGLE" as your search engine

[Vito]

You might want to make it your home page..

http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.htm

Come up with the exact same results as you would on ggl, plus they always have funny photos on the main page 

[Xoce]

 

google is evil.

[Vito]

google is evil.

You got that right.

[Masha]

But doesn't Scroogle use Google, where it sends its queries? The point is not that Google is evil - it is. But the main point is that Google censors its searches. So when you use Scroogle, you get the same censored searches, which will prevent you from finding salient information on the first page.

[Xoce]

yes, that is a big part.  but another part is that scroogle does not let google keep your searches and your information, or know who you are.

[Vito]

But doesn't Scroogle use Google, where it sends its queries? The point is not that Google is evil - it is. But the main point is that Google censors its searches. So when you use Scroogle, you get the same censored searches, which will prevent you from finding salient information on the first page.

It uses the same search format.. so you get the same search results, but Google doesn't make a dime because there are no advertisements supporting Google.

[Zelhar]

But doesn't Scroogle use Google, where it sends its queries? The point is not that Google is evil - it is. But the main point is that Google censors its searches. So when you use Scroogle, you get the same censored searches, which will prevent you from finding salient information on the first page.

Can you give example to what google censors ?

[Masha]

Google censors Obama stories, for example. Google censors Obama-critical blogs. There is such a thing as being banned by Google, then the searches that should bring up your site to the front page suddenly disappear, or your site will be listed on page #98431. This is what they did to Pamela Geller, a righteous Jewish woman who hosts a political blog called Atlas Shrugs.

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/google_eeeeeeevil_tool/

This is my objection to using a search engine like Scroogle. While you avoid paying money to Google (good) and make your searches invisible (also good), you run into the problem of censored data. Your search may not find relevant information, since it uses Google, and Google would have thrown away or banned things that it doesn't like, so that they'll never come up in your search.

[Xoce]

Try a simple search:

obama birth certificate.

See how many results are found by

Google:        285,000 results
Yahoo:    11,700,000 results
Altavista: 11,600,000 results 

11 million results censored by Google.  41 Times less results.  Google shows only 2% of the results yahoo and altavista find.

[q_q_]

Try a simple search:

obama birth certificate.

See how many results are found by

Google:        285,000 results
Yahoo:    11,700,000 results
Altavista: 11,600,000 results 

11 million results censored by Google.  41 Times less results.  Google shows only 2% of the results yahoo and altavista find.

It's not censoring. 

Google's search results on the web, and especially on usenet, are a mess.   Often not all results are shown..

A search for "life", Google gives 1.7 billion, Yahoo gives 7.4 billion.


 

[דוד בן זאב אריה]

google is evil.

I second that thanks

You got that right.

[דוד בן זאב אריה]

Obama Muslim

Google 12.3 Million
Yahoo 65.9 Million

[q_q_]

Obama Muslim

Google 12.3 Million
Yahoo 65.9 Million

You're going to have to use more logic and check things better.

I even said in my post above
A search for "life", Google gives 1.7 billion, Yahoo gives 7.4 billion.

Instead of obama muslim,

Try searching for- human being
Yahoo- 996 million
google- 21.4 million

[muman613]

Be very careful of what you search for using Google. They are tracking what you are searching for and your search log can be used when you are investigated for a crime. I try to avoid using google for all but the most trivial searches.

[q_q_]

well, if being investigated for a crime, then -in theory- your ISP could be asked.. They may track anything(though I doubt they'd bother going back historically, they may make an exception during the period). But other major search engines may easily track searches too - in connection with an IP.

[muman613]

My problem is that if google becomes closely connected with the Federal government though the appointment of google execs to the cabinet I foresee that the government may possibly abuse its power and nullify our sense of privacy.

[Xoce]

Try a simple search:

obama birth certificate.

See how many results are found by

Google:        285,000 results
Yahoo:    11,700,000 results
Altavista: 11,600,000 results 

11 million results censored by Google.  41 Times less results.  Google shows only 2% of the results yahoo and altavista find.

It's not censoring. 

Google's search results on the web, and especially on usenet, are a mess.   Often not all results are shown..

A search for "life", Google gives 1.7 billion, Yahoo gives 7.4 billion.


 

Ok, there are over 4 times as many results for "life" from yahoo than from google.
THERE ARE 41 TIMES as many for "obama birth certificate" from yahoo than from google.

Google:        285,000 results
Yahoo:    11,700,000 results
Altavista: 11,600,000 results

[q_q_]

Try a simple search:

obama birth certificate.

See how many results are found by

Google:        285,000 results
Yahoo:    11,700,000 results
Altavista: 11,600,000 results 

11 million results censored by Google.  41 Times less results.  Google shows only 2% of the results yahoo and altavista find.

It's not censoring. 

Google's search results on the web, and especially on usenet, are a mess.   Often not all results are shown..

A search for "life", Google gives 1.7 billion, Yahoo gives 7.4 billion.


 

Ok, there are over 4 times as many results for "life" from yahoo than from google.
THERE ARE 41 TIMES as many for "obama birth certificate" from yahoo than from google.

Google:        285,000 results
Yahoo:    11,700,000 results
Altavista: 11,600,000 results

now try looking at reply #12 in the thread.

Where Yahoo has 46 times more results for -human being.

you think google is censoring there?

Of course, try viewing all the results, you'll see it's a scam anyway.
The total results can reduce by millions as you go through by the hundred! (and that's with yahoo).  I've seen issues with google's search results.. not returning all of them , as mentioned.

[briann]

In all fairness... Yahoo is just as wacko leftist as Google.

[Masha]

q_q_, read the Atlas Shrugs post that I linked before you argue. Google definitely censors. It's a fact.

[Xoce]

Yes, here is the link Masha posted again

 Atlas' posts on google:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/google_eeeeeeevil_tool/

Read all of them and learn something.

[q_q_]

q_q_, read the Atlas Shrugs post that I linked before you argue. Google definitely censors. It's a fact.

I was arguing that a certain fact did not prove/imply that google censored.

The article you just mentioned again (indeed, I hadn't seen it before)
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/google_eeeeeeevil_tool/

provides good arguments/evidence that they do censor.

well done for finding it.

[Zelhar]

q_q_, read the Atlas Shrugs post that I linked before you argue. Google definitely censors. It's a fact.

I was arguing that a certain fact did not prove/imply that google censored.

The article you just mentioned again (indeed, I hadn't seen it before)
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/google_eeeeeeevil_tool/

provides good arguments/evidence that they do censor.

well done for finding it.

I couldn't find what I was looking for in that article. To prove that Google censors one need to show one website that gets high ranking in other engines but law ranking (or not at all) in google.

[briann]

well, if being investigated for a crime, then -in theory- your ISP could be asked.. They may track anything(though I doubt they'd bother going back historically, they may make an exception during the period). But other major search engines may easily track searches too - in connection with an IP.

Its always a good idea to mask were you've visited.  Firefox has some great cookie managers for privacy.  And if you are a privacy freak... there are extreme options such as TOR or JAP to hide your IP and to encrypt your information.

[q_q_]

q_q_, read the Atlas Shrugs post that I linked before you argue. Google definitely censors. It's a fact.

I was arguing that a certain fact did not prove/imply that google censored.


The article you just mentioned again (indeed, I hadn't seen it before)
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/google_eeeeeeevil_tool/

provides good arguments/evidence that they do censor.

well done for finding it.

I couldn't find what I was looking for in that article. To prove that Google censors one need to show one website that gets high ranking in other engines but law ranking (or not at all) in google.

No, that wouldn't prove anything, because each search engine uses its own ranking system.


That article claims that her website's ranking has suddenly dropped.
That claim would be  evidence, proof infact..
"
  "I was in the top five search results before the story got legs," she said.
  "These stories drove 12,000 to 15,000 people to my site every day."

But now a November earnings report from shows her Google clicks and revenue flat lining since Nov. 20. Daily page impressions dropped from an average of 20,000 and 45,000 to single digits – overnight."

"

Now in a new report.. you can see a possible "explanation"

WND journalist Chelsea enquired, and got this response
"
Hi Chelsea,

Thanks for your inquiry. Atlas Shrugs was in violation of our terms of service. When we are made aware of a potential policy violation, our team of specialists will manually review the site to make sure it abides by our program policies. In this case we have stopped serving ads to Atlas Shrugs.

More information about our policies can be found here: https://www.google.com/adsense/support/bin/answer.py?answer=48182&topic=8423

Thank you,

Elisabeth
"

No info about where in the TOS she has violated.. Pamela has no idea where she is supposed to have violated it.

I think the ranking has returned now.. Pamela says she is back on Google..

The search box on her site is still broken..  at Google's end. (it's as if she has been blacklisted).   

Type some search terms in it.
If you run a search from her site, it says "forbidden".
Press ENTER and the results come up.
If you are not searching from her site, then no matter how many times you do a search, it will work.   Once you are on her site, searching from there, it fails and says Forbidden.

I bet Google if it were possible to take them to court over this, would be able to show that indeed, her website's ranking did drop.. (pages e.g. home webpage and the other pages on her website)

She says she is back on Google.. I think her website's ranking has been restored.

They may have raised it again now since WND enquired, and there has been some publicity.


Google doesn't offer a facility to show you search results on different days. I always thought that was odd not to, since it is interesting historically to see what Google returns over the years.. what people are saying e.t.c. But now I can see why they might not want to! It would reveal google's blunders and intentional malicious tampering.