Search engines scrubbing Hits to protect agenda?

[mandru]

** I'll apologize in advance for grammatic errors and misspellings.  I needed to get this out while it was still fresh in mind and nap time was quickly approaching  :-D **

I was thinking about the never ending (religiously fervent) Greenie lectures we're been being force fed about the Earth's pending doom through rising ocean levels (and its man made climate change cause) when I remembered something I'd seen on TV back in the mid 60's.  There was a documentary about the early American Govt. funded Lewis and Clark expedition to send a explorers to map and report back about the possibility of a proposed ladder of rivers that would allow easy passage from the East coast of the U.S. to the Pacific West coast.  The thing that stood out (as the camera shot panned out over a bit of ocean beach) was a comment made by the narrator.

He said "The point where Lewis and Clark stood at the edge of the Pacific is now a little over 300 feet offshore because of erosion."

It occurred to me that I'd never heard any mention of erosion linked to being a factor in rising ocean levels.  That strikes me as odd.  There's a lot of erosion going on all the time and it's been happening since the first bit of land popped up above water level eons ago.  The Alps were once almost twice as tall as they are now.  In the U.S. the Rockies and the Appalachian Mountains even taller than that.  All of that displaced sediment has to have some effect no matter how small on the world's ocean levels.

When I tried to search "erosion raising ocean levels" with the world's most used search engine it insisted that "raising" was a misspelled word.  ???

When I changed my search term to "erosion affecting ocean levels" the first three pages of results all propounded that climate change is causing the erosion of the world's seas beaches much like our good friend from Australia experienced (in his previous hometown) only the driving force of a huge storm on the waves was omitted.  Not only was there not a single word about the actual information I was investigating I was presented with exactly the type of BS I was attempting to create an argument against.  Clearly another dead end.  :D

So I changed tack.  I tried various searches for silt in the Amazon River entering the Atlantic with less than favorable results and even applying the "Image Search" option left me unsatisfied with little approaching positive results.

As long as I was into it this deep and not ready to give up I went to that search engine's map feature and switching it to World View.  I'm aware that when using this search engine's world map if you look at the North Pole there's no ice because of a process they call De-watered so that (in theory) the contour of the ocean floor can be revealed but when I put in the search term "mouth of the Amazon" it popped me to a location a few thousand miles away from its actual location.  When I finally located the egress of the Amazon into the South Atlantic I noticed something odd.

First off there was no silt plume issuing out into the ocean.  A quick hop around the globe to check each of the large rivers famous for being muddy (that I could think of) were all missing any signs of silt plumes.  So clearly they were all being De-watered like the North Pole but the thing that really stood out for me was in this form of search was that each of these rivers were showing no revealed contour for the seabed they were draining into.

All of them showed their entries into their respective oceans being nearly as smooth and bald as a blue cue-ball.  In fact the Rio Amazonas as named on the map (as if I'd know to search for the Amazon under that name) shows that the silt miraculously vanishes before the river can even reach the ocean. 

The currents of these massive rivers would all dig channels with canyons and sandbars revealing the level of doctoring even these maps have undergone.  :-(

[Art Blade]

interesting. Maybe some geology-related and science-based sites are a better start than google's redacted view of the earth.

[fragger]

Intriguing post mandru :-X

I had a look at Google Earth and I see what you're saying. It's curious how the silt at the mouth of the Amazon not only cuts off before it reaches the sea but abruptly ends in dead straight lines, like someone cropped it with a pair of scissors. There are some other curious things, like how the detail around so much of the world's coastlines is absent. One would think that if they can map the Challenger Deep or the Tonga Trench in such detail, the relatively shallow seabed right off the coast should present no obstacles to mapping. Several glaring examples of this are: Hudson Bay, the regions north of Russia, the sea floor around Indonesia/Malaysia and the region between northern Australia and Papua-New Guinea. I'm no expert, but I wouldn't have thought that the sea floor is virtually table-top smooth over such large distances. Maybe it really is like that, or maybe they just haven't thoroughly mapped out some of these areas yet, I dunno.

Whether this is a deliberate attempt to further an agenda I couldn't say, but I wouldn't put anything past them. It is odd though.

When it comes to climate change, I don't know which claim is the more ludicrous - that we humans exclusively are driving this change, or that we have the wherewithal to keep it from happening. Of course, the climate is changing - it's the climate, that's what it does. Humanity's actions may not exactly be helping things, but to lay the blame entirely at humanity's doorstep is deluded at best and downright insidious at worst, opening up yet another avenue for the powers-that-be to slug people in the form of "carbon tax" and erode another civil liberty or two.

It is estimated that the CO₂ produced by all the biomass in all the world's oceans adds up to about 37,000 billion tons (GT). The CO₂ produced by all the land biomass comes to about 2,000 - 3,000 GT, and the CO₂ that naturally constitutes an inherent part of the atmosphere adds about another 700 GT. Then there are the greenhouse gasses and aerosols produced by volcanism and seismic activity - depending on the frequency of such events during a given year, this can add up to another GT.

Human CO₂ output? Estimates vary from between 6 GT to 30 GT, depending on whom you consult. Even at the max, this means that human civilization produces about 0.075% of the world's CO₂, or less than one tenth of one percent - a vanishingly small amount, comparatively speaking.

And this tiny percentage of world-wide CO₂ emission is going to destabilise the planet's climate? ??? Maybe if we could get all the other animals to stop breathing and farting, and keep volcanoes from erupting, we can get on top of things... ::)

Apart from all that, there are just so many variables in play that nobody can tell what the climate may do in coming years. One other thing that strikes me is that nowhere in any of the climate change debate does anybody mention the one major driving force behind Earth's climactic variations - the Sun. Not so much its temperature output, but its magnetic field fluctuations and sunspot activity with the attendant solar flares and release of charged-particle clouds which affect the Earth's atmosphere - and subsequently, its climate. The Sun is, after all, a long-term variable star. Earth's climactic stability is directly affected by the rise and fall of solar activity, but this little detail always seems to get left out of the debate.

But the radical green movement isn't about to let real science get in the way of its humans-got-it-coming mindset, and those who stand to profit from, and lord it over, their constituents by using climate change as a fear-mongering tactic certainly aren't going to gainsay the greenies.

Regarding the disappearing beach you referred to in your post mandru, it was inevitable that the greenie finger would be pointed at climate change as the culprit, despite the fact that long-term residents have stated that this has happened before and that the beach restores itself during the following twenty years or so. It seems to me that those of a green bent actually want things like this to happen, so that they can crow and pontificate and revel in their perverse desire to see wicked old humanity getting its cosmic comeuppence.

But boy, don't they clam up when they're proven wrong about something...

*****

As an aside, and speaking of Google Maps/Earth, I stumbled across this place during one of my aimless Google Earth rambles:

40°25'55.13"N 90°47'17.03"E

Enter these coords into the search window of Google Maps and go to Earth view (or use Google Earth). See if you can guess what it is. It's huge and it's way out in the middle of nowhere. If you enter the above coordinates then zoom the view out you'll see just what a remote location this place is in. I did manage to find out what it is after a bit of poking around online. A Google Maps/Earth view will yield some photos, which may help to clue you in.

[mandru]

40°25'55.13"N 90°47'17.03"E ?  I gave that a look see fragger and I've got it figured out.

It's a day spa!  Generously provided by the Peoples Republic for valuable Apple product assembly technicians and support staff.  It encourages them to not only meet production quotas but to strive to exceed all expectations of their honorable w@&k stations.  This luxury will help them stay on task and not wander away during their unfortunately required personal time.  ;)

But the radical green movement isn't about to let real science get in the way of its humans-got-it-coming mindset, and those who stand to profit from, and lord it over, their constituents by using climate change as a fear-mongering tactic certainly aren't going to gainsay the greenies.

I remember a time when "Science" and its practitioners were held to the ideal of presenting their theories and the community of their peers would examine their data and present verifying or opposing data to deny, confirm, or append that initial theory.  I grew up in a time where the future was entrusted to the hands of Scientists with the full expectation that they would hold fast to the integrity of their findings.  I wanted to be among that body of w@&k and part of that future.

It was a time where Truth was a non-subjective goal and while opinions could vary, dissension was still allowed and more often than not proved to be closer to truth than the original theory.  The Greenies at all levels (don't discount the leverage that comes from massed nobody bloggers smearing their targets) will go out of their way to discredit and destroy any who suggest that seeking Truth should be included in the scientific conversation.

Now so many in that professional description are simply trying to elbow each other out of the way and climbing over each other to get to the front of the line for government grants and funding.  When any political faction determines the definition and parameters of "Science" nothing good can come from it.

I've come to despise Bill Nye who had an entertaining and humor driven TV show (often provided by teachers in school to their students) that was instrumental in inspiring and encouraging youth to dream of becoming scientists.  But by throwing his recognition as a television entertainer out as an expert in global ecology to keep a pay check coming in as far as I'm concerned has brought me to consider him as the King of the Science Whores.

Let's not confuse whorishness to prostitution.  While I never have or never will engage a prostitute for sexual services I have seen that there are among them a desire to provide a straight forward service where the terms and conditions are firmly set and you get exactly what you pay for.  In my personal definition of any fulfilling the trade of being a whore simply cannot and should never be trusted for anything beyond lies and betrayal.

Sadly we've reached the point where even reputable scientists are being forced to concede to the wall of pressure to conform.  Basically whoring their principals out even though their fields of studies have nothing to do with weather or climate change if they wish to remain in their scientific fields.

If indeed the company behind this search engine are intentionally editing their maps to meet Green Agenda goals by hiding conflicting facts then they have taken a decisive step towards establishing themselves in the whore camp.


I am currently setting up the details with a local shop to switch my comp system over to a dual boot Linux system First to get away from Microsoft as well as walking away from the company I've noted behind the editing hit returns on my searches and their services.