• We should now be fully online following an overnight outage. Apologies for any inconvenience, we do not expect there to be any further issues.

If you trust snopes.com...

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
It's an odd experience watching someone deliberately jump off a cliff.

Keep in mind this result from google:

Tr8eP4v.png
 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
This is kind of amazing. Your original post was shown to be comically false and it's obvious you were duped by conservative media.

My original post was a direct TRUE result from google, with the message "Keep in mind this result from google:"

Which part of it is false? None of it. STFU please with your baseless ramblings.
 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
Uhh, or because it requires the reader actually pay attention to what they're reading. There's no 'obfuscation' there. There's a 'claim' 'rating' and 'what's true' which makes 110% sense once you read it. If a person is literally using a dozen words from a google search as their 'news', they deserve what they get.

So you think it's fine for google to report "obama born in kenya" as true based on snopes (without the clarification that snopes was only talking about a book), AND you think it's okay for google to report something false that is demonstrably true as written.

Essentially it sounds like you are fine with snopes and google making up true or false ratings with zero consistency at all. It's kinda scary that so many people rely on google and by default will trust the ratings, given how wrong they can be.
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
Yes, let your hate run through you. You are an emotional creature and you can't understand logic.

I get it, but it means you lose the argument by default. Sorry, those are the rules.

Hate? I have hate? A bit of projection on your part? I don't hate anyone.

Remember Bowling Green!
 
Last edited:
Feb 16, 2005
14,080
5,452
136
So you think it's fine for google to report "obama born in kenya" as true based on snopes (without the clarification that snopes was only talking about a book), AND you think it's okay for google to report something false that is demonstrably true as written.

Essentially it sounds like you are fine with snopes and google making up true or false ratings with zero consistency at all. It's kinda scary that so many people rely on google and by default will trust the ratings, given how wrong they can be.
nice, this post is kinda like watching this gif
a26tk8J.gif
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,373
33,011
136
So you think it's fine for google to report "obama born in kenya" as true based on snopes (without the clarification that snopes was only talking about a book), AND you think it's okay for google to report something false that is demonstrably true as written.

Essentially it sounds like you are fine with snopes and google making up true or false ratings with zero consistency at all. It's kinda scary that so many people rely on google and by default will trust the ratings, given how wrong they can be.
What does this have to do with Google? What exactly do you think Google is doing?
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
100,347
17,914
126
Great, op doesn't understand web indexing either.

Nex thing you know he will be calling magnets hoaxes.
 

allisolm

Elite Member
Administrator
Jan 2, 2001
25,322
4,987
136
So you think it's fine for google to report "obama born in kenya" as true based on snopes (without the clarification that snopes was only talking about a book), AND you think it's okay for google to report something false that is demonstrably true as written.

Essentially it sounds like you are fine with snopes and google making up true or false ratings with zero consistency at all. It's kinda scary that so many people rely on google and by default will trust the ratings, given how wrong they can be.

Google DOESN'T report that Obama born in Kenya is true based on Snopes (without the clarification that snopes was only talking about a book). They report that Obama's literary agent SAID (with the clarification that snopes was only talking about a promotional list) that he was born in Kenya

It's right there in your OP.
Obama's Literary Agent Says Obama was born in Kenya?
" Claim: A 1991 literary client list promotional list identified Barack Obama as having been born in Kenya
Fact Check by Snopes.com: true."

Neither Google nor Snopes.com made up anything at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ns1

FIVR

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2016
3,753
911
106
OP you've unleashed the liberals rancorous hatred upon yourself by pointing out their lies. But do not despair, for you are a success. You are a martyr for truth, and in your struggle you have shown us all the meaning of loyalty and, of course, discernment. Godspeed OP.
 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
Google DOESN'T report that Obama born in Kenya is true based on Snopes (without the clarification that snopes was only talking about a book). They report that Obama's literary agent SAID (with the clarification that snopes was only talking about a promotional list) that he was born in Kenya

It's right there in your OP.
Obama's Literary Agent Says Obama was born in Kenya?
" Claim: A 1991 literary client list promotional list identified Barack Obama as having been born in Kenya
Fact Check by Snopes.com: true."

Neither Google nor Snopes.com made up anything at all.

The query is "obama born in kenya".

Nothing about his agent or book or anything else. For a rational person, if you ask a question and someone supplies additional information and says "TRUE" the natural assumption is that the answer is your question is true.

Most people won't click the link or look at the fine print.
 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
8Z5p7qj.jpg


Then there is the other end of the spectrum, where the query is absolutely true, but instead you get a false result because snopes adds additional false assumptions which were not even part of the original claim. It's a textbook straw man argument.
 

FIVR

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2016
3,753
911
106
^The liberals have been manipulating google search results for years! It's part of their secret FAIR N BALANCED malware suite they've pre-installed on the intel Management Engine, which allows it to serve as a permanent pre-installed rootkit to all PCs sold in the US. This is what is causing these strange results, OP.
 
Feb 4, 2009
35,862
17,403
136
OP you've unleashed the liberals rancorous hatred upon yourself by pointing out their lies. But do not despair, for you are a success. You are a martyr for truth, and in your struggle you have shown us all the meaning of loyalty and, of course, discernment. Godspeed OP.

Please point out the lie in easy to understand words that don't include any mention of "liberals" or any derivatives because that is not needed for a direct question like I am asking of you.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
62,831
19,043
136
The query is "obama born in kenya".

Nothing about his agent or book or anything else. For a rational person, if you ask a question and someone supplies additional information and says "TRUE" the natural assumption is that the answer is your question is true.

Most people won't click the link or look at the fine print.
This is like asking a question, and walking away when the person is five words into their answer.
Not the behavior of a rational person who actually wants the answer to their question.
 
Feb 4, 2009
35,862
17,403
136
^The liberals have been manipulating google search results for years! It's part of their secret FAIR N BALANCED malware suite they've pre-installed on the intel Management Engine, which allows it to serve as a permanent pre-installed rootkit to all PCs sold in the US. This is what is causing these strange results, OP.

Oops we posted simultaneously. I just don't know what to say here other than us liberals like to break up big companies but we tend to get stymied by big business Republicans

*wouldn't a different search engine have different results?

*Why would MS add a root kit for an obvious competitor?

*Wouldn't Linux or OSX yield different results?

*Wouldn't a mobile OS yield different results

*Wouldn't someone with a non partisan point of view expose this

*MS & Google have to have dissatisfied employee's how come none have ratted them out?
 
Last edited: