Google bomb ID

From God is for Suckers I learn that Leiter Reports is proposing to Google bomb “Intelligent Design”:

Post something on "Intelligent Design" … which links to the authoritative statement by the National Center for Science Education, which I've linked to here by way of illustration.  This way when those genuinely seeking information start Googling, they'll get to the right place.

If you’ve never heard of this, the Google bomb is (in this case) an attempt to place the National Center for Science Education’s excellent "Intelligent Design" Not Accepted by Most Scientists page at the top of any Google searches for the phrase “Intelligent Design”. If you have a blog or other web site, what you need to do is use the phrase “Intelligent Design” as a hyperlink to the NCSE’s paper the way I have. If enough people do this, because of the way its algorithms work, Google will return the NCSE’s paper at the top.

Comments

[Ecks Ridgehead]

Inspired me to write a little something to help out...a creative way of Google Bombing.

[Phil Plait]

Sadly, given that I am a scientist, trackbacks still baffle me. Anyway, I posted about this on my blog: ID is da bomb!

[French Leave]

The Skeptic's Dictionary entry for Intelligent Design could be given a boost too; it's already in the top five results for the term in major search engines.

[dmatson]

Great idea, however the Skeptics Dictionary entry for Inteligent Design is actually a much better candidate for a link text campaign, aka "google bomb". The fact that is has the phrase Inteligent Design in the title tag is very helpful. The NSCE site does not have that, so it would take more links to overcome and outrank the other sites.

[Eric]

Why do people care where we come from? Because we want to know where we go. Death is shrouded in mystery, and we want to know wether or not we go somewhere when we die, or are we doomed to simply be a lifeless corpse.
Now, if one can prove Intelligent Design, then we can be assured not to be just corpses. However, if one can prove Intelligent Design, one must be wary with one's action, less you go somewhere you would rather not be after death. Possibly, forever.
Now see, some don't want to end after death but others don't want to be tortured for eternity. And where we came from will have a strong effect on where we go. But even an if an omnipotent being created us, does 'he' gaurantee us an afterlife? And if we did come about by chance, cannot not there be a chance that some remnant of our minds will not remain?
Now, here is the biggest question. Why ponder upon this fact when you could be living out your mortality to its fullest?

[BronzeDog]

Why ponder upon this fact when you could be living out your mortality to its fullest?

I do it because pondering evolution is useful in helping me live out my mortality to its fullest. It tickles my intellect, gives me pleasant surprises, and even helps me design better giant robots.

[Tarage]

My question is simple... why? Is Intelligent Design such a threat to all of you that you feel you have to go out of your way to mock it? What will this accomplish? Okay, maybe you'll piss off a few religious types and convert a few people on the fence... but is it worth making an ass of yourselves?

I always thought science was about being open to new ideas... this seems awfly closed minded if you ask me. So much for tolerance.

And for your information, I am not religious at all. Still, I have enough respect for my fellow human being not to needlessly mock them for no reason other than so satisfy my pathetic ego.

If anyone wants to talk about this further with me, you have my e-mail. As long as you are civil, I will be as well. I just sugest you stop acting like spoiled children and grow up...

[BronzeDog]

ID is a threat, and it's an old idea, not a new one: It's giving up and accrediting everything to the deity du jour. Despite all its disguises, ID is still just an argument from ignorance and lack of imagination. If we gave ID any illusion of credibility, it'd be encouraging mankind to perform the same millenia-old mistakes that put us in the dark ages.

In the old days, people thought lightning was caused by deities because they didn't know how nature could cause it. Now we do. ID is no different.

Also, the article in the google bomb link is a very good analysis of ID. If someone looks up ID online, we're making sure they get good information.

[Skeptico]

Skeptico replies to Tarage

Re: My question is simple... why? Is Intelligent Design such a threat to all of you that you feel you have to go out of your way to mock it? What will this accomplish? Okay, maybe you'll piss off a few religious types and convert a few people on the fence... but is it worth making an ass of yourselves?

It’s because ID is not science. And if our next generation of scientists can’t tell the difference between science and creation myths disguised as science, they won’t be very good scientists.

This is a critical thinking blog, in case you didn’t figure that out. (There are some clues.) That means, amongst other things, that I expose pseudoscience. If you can’t take that, go read another blog.

Re: I always thought science was about being open to new ideas... this seems awfly closed minded if you ask me. So much for tolerance.

Oh boy, you’re new here aren’t you? This is just a lame appeal to be open minded. Do you really think we haven’t heard that one before? Go get some new arguments.

Re: And for your information, I am not religious at all. Still, I have enough respect for my fellow human being not to needlessly mock them for no reason other than so satisfy my pathetic ego.

And yet you’re here, needlessly trying to mock me for no reason other than so satisfy your pathetic ego. The irony.

Re: If anyone wants to talk about this further with me, you have my e-mail. As long as you are civil, I will be as well. I just sugest you stop acting like spoiled children and grow up...

And I think I’ll leave that there without any additional comment. The irony should be obvious to anyone else reading this.

[Tarage]

You didn't answer my question... and yet you still found time to say that I'm doing this for my ego, which is funny. If I were doing this for my ego, I could find other more productive ways. I seriously doubt THAT many people care about this little protest you are attempting, as the results of my latest google search show you aren't even CLOSE to the top. This is quite funny to me.

I still don't understand why you all have found your persional mission in trying to temper tantrum away ID. You say it isn't a science, so? You say it probably isn't true, so? As far as I am aware, you have yet to find enough proof to put anything you say about ID in stone. Likewise, those on the side of ID don't have any solid proof either. But I don't see anyone on that side trying to silence you. Yet this is exactially what you are trying to do to them. You don't like ID, so it must be mocked, insulted, and those who believe in it should be labled as fools. Do correct me if I am wrong.

As far as I undererstand, though a frince group or two might be trying to say ID is a science, most don't. On the same token, they also don't want evolution cramed down their throats. It doesn't seem like a horible idea to give kids in school a choice between what they want to hear about. Or, are you against choice as well?

You claim I havn't been civil, and this makes me laugh. Perhaps I havn't been the most calm, calculated person to post, but atleast I had the decency to try to form an argument, even though I really don't believe in either side. However, Skeptico, you took my words as a persional attack on yourself. I can seperate an oppinion from a person... can't you?

PS: My comment about spoiled children still stands. All I see is an effort to silence something you don't agree with out of spite. Please correct me.

[BronzeDog]

I still don't understand why you all have found your persional mission in trying to temper tantrum away ID.

It's not science, and it's harmful to scientific methods of thinking.

You say it isn't a science, so? You say it probably isn't true, so?

Do you not care that something unscientific is being pushed into science classes?

As far as I am aware, you have yet to find enough proof to put anything you say about ID in stone.

Then find some piece of ID that contradicts what we say.

But I don't see anyone on that side trying to silence you.

They're trying to drown us out by introducing anti-scientific thinking into children.

Yet this is exactially what you are trying to do to them. You don't like ID, so it must be mocked, insulted, and those who believe in it should be labled as fools. Do correct me if I am wrong.

We mock ID because it's indefensible anti-science nonsense.

As far as I undererstand, though a frince group or two might be trying to say ID is a science, most don't.

So, why is it being forced into some schools?

On the same token, they also don't want evolution cramed down their throats. It doesn't seem like a horible idea to give kids in school a choice between what they want to hear about. Or, are you against choice as well?

Evolution is based on science. Science is what's supposed to be taught in science classes. The "choice" is between science and unfalsifiable superstition. Between reality and fairy tales. Science being taught in science classes is the choice that should win every time.

You claim I havn't been civil, and this makes me laugh.

Jumping to calling us close-minded without knowing our arguments wasn't very civil.

All I see is an effort to silence something you don't agree with out of spite. Please correct me.

We aren't pushing for censorship. We're pushing for good science to be taught in science class and non-science to not be taught in science class. Spite has nothing to do with it. Also, calling an indefensible idea indefensible isn't "silencing", so don't characterize it as such.

[Skeptico]

Skeptico replies to Tarage

Re: You didn't answer my question...

Yes I did. I just didn’t provide a detailed answer, but then again I have already done that in my numerous other posts on the subject. It was not my intention nor do I have the need in my reply to your silly comment, to explain the entire problem with ID. Go read my other posts. Also read these blogs:

Pharyngula
The Loom
Red state Rabble
Panda’s Thumb
Evolutionblog

When (if?) you have a clue about this subject you may try to debate me.

Re: yet you still found time to say that I'm doing this for my ego, which is funny. If I were doing this for my ego, I could find other more productive ways. I seriously doubt THAT many people care about this little protest you are attempting, as the results of my latest google search show you aren't even CLOSE to the top. This is quite funny to me.

Then why are you here? Why do you care so much?

Clearly, you protest too much.

Re: I still don't understand why you all have found your persional mission in trying to temper tantrum away ID.

Appeal to emotion / appeal to ridicule fallacious argument. Don’t be a jerk. (Seriously – this is a final warning.)

Re: You say it isn't a science, so? You say it probably isn't true, so? As far as I am aware, you have yet to find enough proof to put anything you say about ID in stone. Likewise, those on the side of ID don't have any solid proof either. But I don't see anyone on that side trying to silence you. Yet this is exactially what you are trying to do to them. You don't like ID, so it must be mocked, insulted, and those who believe in it should be labled as fools. Do correct me if I am wrong.

Your references to “proof” show you are a novice when it comes to science. Scientists rarely talk about “proof”. However, they do look at evidence. And the evidence for evolution is overwhelming. There is no evidence for ID. Again, if you read something about this subject you would know this. I have no need or desire in this comment to provide even a fraction of the evidence for evolution or the problems with ID. Read my other posts.

Re: As far as I undererstand, though a frince group or two might be trying to say ID is a science, most don't.

Then you clearly don’t understand it. That is precisely what they are trying to do.

Re: On the same token, they also don't want evolution cramed down their throats. It doesn't seem like a horible idea to give kids in school a choice between what they want to hear about. Or, are you against choice as well?

Oh boy – something else that has been covered and debunked no end of times. You really think we should Let the kids decide?

Re: You claim I havn't been civil, and this makes me laugh. Perhaps I havn't been the most calm, calculated person to post, but atleast I had the decency to try to form an argument, even though I really don't believe in either side.

You formed an “argument”? Let’s see:

- Why is ID such a threat?
- Be open minded
- Don’t mock others
- You’re just satisfying your ego
- You’re spoilt children

You think that’s an argument? It’s a childish rant. Present some evidence and some non-fallacious arguments.

Re: However, Skeptico, you took my words as a persional attack on yourself. I can seperate an oppinion from a person

Can you really? Let’s see:

Re: PS: My comment about spoiled children still stands.

LOL – followed by an argument directly about the person. Do you read what you write before pressing “post”?

Re: All I see is an effort to silence something you don't agree with out of spite. Please correct me.

Consider yourself corrected.

One final note – if you want to reply again you are going to have to present some actual arguments, not appeals to ridicule or emotion, or other nonsense. This is not your personal space where you get to rant freestyle at will – present some real arguments or go away.

[Tarage]

Meh... I guess I don't care anymore. I tried to read your responces but couldn't get past "It's not science, and it's harmful to scientific methods of thinking."

You seem to think that ID is somehow dangerous to your way of life, and that makes your arguments worthless in my oppinion. I take solice that, as long as I and people like me see through this pathetic attempt to drown out anything but what you belive, your cause will never go anywhere.

I'll leave you to play in this false world you've created for yourselves. You oubiously think that ID, and anyone who believes in it, is worthless. I'll be over here in reality, thank you very much.

Enjoy your pointless, doomed cause. ^_^

[BronzeDog]

Meh... I guess I don't care anymore. I tried to read your responces but couldn't get past "It's not science, and it's harmful to scientific methods of thinking."

Show me a version of ID that's falsifiable, and not an argument from ignorance from lack of imagination.

You seem to think that ID is somehow dangerous to your way of life, and that makes your arguments worthless in my oppinion.

Appeal to motive.

I take solice that, as long as I and people like me see through this pathetic attempt to drown out anything but what you belive, your cause will never go anywhere.

Why should people believe anything except what the evidence says?

I'll leave you to play in this false world you've created for yourselves. You oubiously think that ID, and anyone who believes in it, is worthless. I'll be over here in reality, thank you very much.

Stop making stuff up.

Enjoy your pointless, doomed cause. ^_^

Lost causes are the only causes worth fighting for. If you consider science pointless, you should take yourself off the power grid and stop using the Internet.

[Skeptico]

And in Tarage's final comment above you see the best the proponents of ID (which is what Tarage is, despite his protestations to the contrary), have to offer – no evidence, no understanding of what science is (or why it matters); just attempts at ridicule and claims he doesn’t really care. Pathetic.

This post is closed to comments. I have better things to do than respond to any more of this kind of drivel.