Thank you for that. You are right, an argument on search engines is retarded. The object of the first link was to give the reader the choice of the source he wanted to use for the news being brought (google news groups, not just google search). We all know different media outlets have different political views, and that tends to affect the way the story is brought out; what's neat with the google news link I posted is the possibility of reading the same event from different sources around the world (from CNN to independent outlets).grimey wrote:Jeebus... if you're going to have an arguement based on search engine results (which is retarded, CJ...), at least do it right:the_professor wrote:Here's my link to 9,390,000 pages about Global Cooling:
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=glo ... ling&meta=
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?la ... al+cooling
(Global warming wins 7:1, roughly, not that this matters)
p.s.: that ratio is actually biased because of the links that have the words "global cooling" in them, you will notice that the majority of them say that global cooling is a fallacy. So even though there is a 7 to 1 ratio of the words "global cooling" vs "global warming" the ratio of websites that claim that global warming is man made, vs the ratio of websites that claim that global cooling is happening (and not that it's bs), is much much higher. But like you said, that doesn't matter.