This doesn't fit very well with the human induced Global Warming Theory

[dennishoddy]

You do know that Google does not produce the content, they just...never mind. Why bother. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

They just produce the algorithms that produce the search results they want you to see first.

Robert Epstein from the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology has spent four years trying to reverse engineer Google’s search algorithms. He believes, based on systematic research, that Google has the power to rig elections through something he calls the search engine manipulation effect (SEME).

Epstein conducted five experiments in two countries to find that biased rankings in search results can shift the opinions of undecided voters. If Google tweaks its algorithm to show more positive search results for a candidate, the searcher may form a more positive opinion of that candidate.

In September 2016, Epstein released findings, published through Russian news agency Sputnik News, that indicated Google had suppressed negative autocomplete search results relating to Hillary Clinton.

“We know that if there’s a negative autocomplete suggestion in the list, it will draw somewhere between five and 15 times as many clicks as a neutral suggestion,” Epstein said. “If you omit negatives for one perspective, one hotel chain or one candidate, you have a heck of a lot of people who are going to see only positive things for whatever the perspective you are supporting.”

Even changing the order in which certain search terms appear in the autocompleted list can make a huge impact, with the first result drawing the most clicks, he said.
At the time, Google said the autocomplete algorithm was designed to omit disparaging or offensive terms associated with individuals’ names but that it wasn’t an “exact science”.

Then there’s the secret recipe of factors that feed into the algorithm Google uses to determine a web page’s importance – embedded with the biases of the humans who programmed it. These factors include how many and which other websites link to a page, how much traffic it receives, and how often a page is updated.

Ace, your a troll of the worst sort. Almost all of the information you post has been blatently false. Trump and his organization did not collude with the Russians, Trump and his organization did not conspire with Russia to beat Hillary, Trumps son-in-Law is not a suspect in creating a back door to Russia, and all the other drivel you post on this forum.
It was refreshing to not hear RUSSIA! RUSSIA! RUSSIA! 24-7 from the liberal left that you represent. You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[Dave70968]

They just produce the algorithms that produce the search results they want you to see first.

Robert Epstein from the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology has spent four years trying to reverse engineer Google’s search algorithms. He believes, based on systematic research, that Google has the power to rig elections through something he calls the search engine manipulation effect (SEME).

Epstein conducted five experiments in two countries to find that biased rankings in search results can shift the opinions of undecided voters. If Google tweaks its algorithm to show more positive search results for a candidate, the searcher may form a more positive opinion of that candidate.

In September 2016, Epstein released findings, published through Russian news agency Sputnik News, that indicated Google had suppressed negative autocomplete search results relating to Hillary Clinton.

“We know that if there’s a negative autocomplete suggestion in the list, it will draw somewhere between five and 15 times as many clicks as a neutral suggestion,” Epstein said. “If you omit negatives for one perspective, one hotel chain or one candidate, you have a heck of a lot of people who are going to see only positive things for whatever the perspective you are supporting.”

Even changing the order in which certain search terms appear in the autocompleted list can make a huge impact, with the first result drawing the most clicks, he said.
At the time, Google said the autocomplete algorithm was designed to omit disparaging or offensive terms associated with individuals’ names but that it wasn’t an “exact science”.

Then there’s the secret recipe of factors that feed into the algorithm Google uses to determine a web page’s importance – embedded with the biases of the humans who programmed it. These factors include how many and which other websites link to a page, how much traffic it receives, and how often a page is updated.

Ace, your a troll of the worst sort. Almost all of the information you post has been blatently false. Trump and his organization did not collude with the Russians, Trump and his organization did no conspire to beat Hillary, Trumps son-in-Law is not a suspect in creating a back door to Russia, and all the other drivel you post on this forum.
It was refreshing to not hear RUSSIA! RUSSIA! RUSSIA! 24-7 from the liberal left that you represent. You should be ashamed of yourself.

How does any of that apply to the matter at hand, specifically A) the radius of Earth, or B) the amount of shift in axial wobble?

 

[dennishoddy]

How does any of that apply to the matter at hand, specifically A) the radius of Earth, or B) the amount of shift in axial wobble?

I'm guessing you didn't see the post from ACE I quoted?

 

[lasher]

1) You choose "remcall" a figure, even when you could find an accurate number in about thirty seconds with tools already at your fingertips
2) You use that figure to support an argument; moreover, an argument that has its grounding in science, which is all about verifying or disproving facts
3) You get called on your bull, with some very simple math that shows you off by a factor of a million times
4) Rather than admit your error, you say "hurr-durr, your facts are biased!"
5) You get butthurt when challenged on your claim of bias, claiming your laziness justifies your wrongness
6) You double down by slinging an ad hominem attack rather than addressing the factual issue

Yeah, I'm okay with condemning you and considering these facts as I assess your (total lack of) credibility in anything you say in the future. Also, I'm not that kind of lawyer, but, again, facts obviously mean nothing to you; you've made your decisions, and by-gawd, you're going to stick to them, facts be damned!

i'm not arguing spit from shinola, frankly scarlett i don't give a damn. altho i do find winding you up to be an amusing time, and so easy to do, just like the little rubber band planes. i stated in the post what i remembered, if my memory was incorrect there are several ways to point that out, you chose the most hostile one of the bunch. remember, i'm not a christian, and the only cheek i will turn is one of them below my belt line, you can pick which one to kiss. see how magnanimous i am? please do me the very great favor of ignoring me, that would please me no end

 

[Dave70968]

I'm guessing you didn't see the post from ACE I quoted?

I did. I'm just wondering where any claim of "bias" is even remotely relevant in the context of this discussion. Earth's radius is not a matter of opinion; the NASA report articulating how much axial shift had occurred might be, but you'd be hard-pressed to disprove it; and the trig, well, that's my own work product; disprove it at your leisure. I still don't see where there's any room for bias to swing the answer, though.

 

[dennishoddy]

I did. I'm just wondering where any claim of "bias" is even remotely relevant in the context of this discussion. Earth's radius is not a matter of opinion; the NASA report articulating how much axial shift had occurred might be, but you'd be hard-pressed to disprove it; and the trig, well, that's my own work product; disprove it at your leisure. I still don't see where there's any room for bias to swing the answer, though.

This is OSA. The context of this discussion doens't mean shat. That unicorn theorum is thrown out the door every post that has ever been on OSA.
I was responding to ACE's post about algorithms. It didn't have a freeking thing to do with the axial shift of anything but his troll post. Did you even read my post? It was clear as air about the content.

 

[Ace_on_the_Turn]

This is OSA. The context of this discussion doens't mean shat. That unicorn theorum is thrown out the door every post that has ever been on OSA.
I was responding to ACE's post about algorithms. It didn't have a freeking thing to do with the axial shift of anything but his troll post. Did you even read my post? It was clear as air about the content.

Poor, poor Dennis. Your child-like understanding of the world is almost amusing.

 

[Gunbuffer]

Poor, poor Dennis. Your child-like understanding of the world is almost amusing.

You have brain damage, you know it all piece of s....

 

[Ace_on_the_Turn]

You have brain damage, you know it all piece of s....

Thank you for your thoughtful post. I understand how difficult it is for a person like you to string together that many words, so, I applaud your effort.

 

[steelfingers]