Google dislikes critique of FEMA Study on the WTC collapse?

[tenenbaum]

Everyone,
If you entered as the key words in Google search engine the title of my critique published here three (3) days ago “FEMA contradicts laws of physics in the WTC collapse Study!”, you got as first the page http://marketplace.designcommunity.com/search.php?search_author=Richard+Haut&showresults=posts showing results of Search for Author Richard Haut (who did not write the article, but only the responses) with the option Display results as Posts clicked on in effect very effectively misinforming, what the article is about. The appropriate pages http://arch.designcommunity.com/forum-6.html or http://www.designcommunity.com/forums/forum-6.html are way dawn at the bottom of Google search results.

Is it possible that Google does not like truth about FEMA Study or DesignCommunity.com included such a search result page for posts of Richard Haut on its server for Google to find it first? Six irrelevant results after the result for posts of Richard Haut and ahead of the appropriate results, which until yesterday had been still displayed as the first and second, suggest that Google is at fault. What a pity Google or Architecture Forum?

[Richard Haut]

I agree with you, Eugene - Mr. Google operates a very efficient internet search system.

[tenenbaum]

Richard,
So your diversion from the subject matter to Mars through your posts to my article “FEMA contradicts laws of physics in the WTC collapse Study!” was not an accident! Otherwise Google would not have anything to divert to. Very clever!

[Richard Haut]

while the Google Corporation may of course have plans for expansion, I believe that its (highly efficient) services are currently limited to just one planet.

[P.C.]

Hi

Then I better remember to fill in the gravity informations before pressing the button ;((

P.C.

[Kevin]

Eugene, in the search results you reference, I see your name BEFORE Richard's.

Google links to a page, which in this forum corresponds to a thread. There is no such thing as linking to Richard's responses separately from your initial posting and followup comments.

The Google link is to the whole thread! Be glad that their automatic algorithims bring your comments to the first page of the search results within days of your posting.

This dispassionate automated process is giving your comments significant exposure. And it really does not reflect well on your analysis that you are so quick to suspect Google.

In the inherently passionate context of our wild-and-wooly grassroots free speech site PetitionOnline.com, we've seen quite a few allegations of concern about Google indexing and results, as well as sincerely-felt and often-signed complaints about the ranking of certain distasteful pages.

But even having seen so many expressions of concern and suspicion, I am aware of no convincing evidence of Google slanting of search results for political or similar purposes. To date, there is no convincing evidence of any basis to such concerns. None.

[Richard Haut]

If you put "FEMA contradicts laws of physics in the WTC collapse Study!" into the Google search as Eugene suggests, then he is right, and we can all be as pleased as Eugene that it links through to my comments first.

So I can confirm Kevin's view that there is "no convincing evidence of Google slanting of search results for political or similar purposes".

It shows what a fair-minded organisation Google is and how well they understand the importance of placing subjects in order of priority and relevance.

[Kevin]

It looks like sometimes I get the "Search" results first, and sometimes I get the straight forum thread first.

Anyway, suppression of the "Search" results is something for us to manage at the level of our web server. (Not a Google issue, either.) In progress.

[tenenbaum]

Kevin,
It is good that you finally got it! But now you can divert the discussion from FEMA contradicts laws of physics in the WTC collapse Study! to this discussion about Google dislikes critique of FEMA Study on the WTC collapse?, which now appears first when the words FEMA contradicts laws of physics in the WTC collapse Study! are searched by Google, and presents me as at least an impulsive person (which I may be), so maybe not trustworthy. Good job in sinking the inconvenient topic!

Sorry Richard for suggesting… you may not even be aware of. The previously popping up as the first page http://marketplace.designcommunity.com/search.php?search_author=Richard+Haut&showresults=posts, which was not an existing page, but a result of process of artificial and complex composing of a search for Richard’s posts indicated by the ending search_author=Richard+Haut&showresults=posts, cannot be an accident, because the content displayed by the page did not even include the sentence searched, so it was not even close to what had been searched! So, how a search result provided as the first, that is not a close match, can be displayed as the best match, when the exact match is displayed as the seventh? “Funny” accident!

Now, such primitive tricks can be substituted by not so obvious. “Great” job! If you enter to Google search engine the words WTC Eugene Tenenbaum you will still get the appropriate article first or rather the second. How come there is not a problem to search the same Design Community producing appropriately www.designcommunity.com/discussion/25220.html, and not, when the topic may be inconvenient? What a pity!

[tenenbaum]

Kevin,
Thanks for partially remedying the problem. Still, providing at all the search for Richard or his posts as results of Google search for my article is misleading especially now, when the most recent Richard’s posts are not on the article’s subject, but on the subsequent and irrelevant issue of this regretful manipulation.

You can still do better by removing at all of providing search for Richard or his posts, because a Google search for my article makes them fully available, as subsequent to the article, i.e. immediately following it and within its context. On the other hand, Richard’s posts alone, as provided now, are out of the context, so they are misleading!

[tenenbaum]

The complete article FEMA contradicts laws of physics in the WTC collapse Study! with all the pictures is now available in two parts at http://groups.msn.com/FEMAmisledthepublicabouttheWTCcollapse/documents.msnw, and all the pictures are separately to be seen on Page 1 & 2 at http://groups.msn.com/FEMAmisledthepublicabouttheWTCcollapse/shoebox.msnw. If I find a storage providing URLs for the photos, I will publish the complete article here. In the meantime enjoy everything inconveniently.

[tenenbaum]

Update:
The article FEMA contradicts laws of physics in the WTC collapse Study!, with fast links to all the pictures, can be read at http://vancouver.indymedia.org/news/2004/09/159667.php, though some links attached to the picture names got messed up, but the following each picture ones are correct (it is difficult to master HTML in one hour).

The downloading has never worked, but all the 12 pages can be viewed at http://groups.msn.com/FEMAmisledthepublicabouttheWTCcollapse/toview.msnw, and the pictures alone are on Page 1 & 2 at http://groups.msn.com/FEMAmisledthepublicabouttheWTCcollapse/figures.msnw.

[tenenbaum]

A vigorous discussion about a conspiracy among officials within US took place at http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/09/296788.shtml. There must be reasons for such a theory indicating a strong resentment against the alleged conspirators here. That is really very sad.

[tenenbaum]

...and on a different note at http://nyc.indymedia.org/newswire/display_any/117550.

[tenenbaum]

The New York Times 10/20/04 article "Study Suggests Design Flaws Didn't Doom Towers" at http://www.nytimes.com/ads/carrotink/CarrotInkApril28.html should be actually read "Study Suggests [Incorrectly] Design Flaws Didn't Doom Towers", because of its following quotes: