Are you seriously implying that house and Senate testimonies are incapable of being nothing more than political theater? You seriously want to imply that given your disdain for Democrats use of Congressional hearings and calling witnesses. I guess you found a new found respect for Blasey Ford.
No, it just shows he has a an actual personal vendetta against Google which is a far more powerful motivator than political leanings. You bring his political leanings as evidence that he is objective and shocked chagrined when done e brings obvious evidence on the contrary that the dude has a literal drawn out personal vendetta with the company.
Personal Vendetta. Tell me more about Dr. Epstein...a name that you probably didn't know until 30 minutes ago.
Where have I said anything about the psychology professor's politics? Here again is what I posted: So again, he started his study on Google after Google shut his web site down for malware (which the professor later acknowledged). Then began emailing Google executives, the press, and elected officials complaining about Google. Is anything I wrote incorrect? And... why is it so important to you that I read his study? Are you the psychologist? Related to him? Your feelings seem just as hurt as his...
I'm talking about your new found respect and gravitas you have for Congressional testimonies and they are above political theater.
You also posted the following. I responded. If you don't want a question answered, don't ask it. And I asked the relevance to the studies and how they were impacted by it yet strangely, you fail to answer that. Is anything you wrote relevant to the results of the studies? Feelings? LOL. Another deflection. Now, if you're done talking about my "feelings" maybe we can comment on the actual topic I brought up which is his research showing Google bias towards leftist candidates and the impact of that bias? Any further lack of response would indicate to me you're throwing up the white flag.
Major implications for 2020. SCOTUS ruling that POTUS can redirect funds for political purposes with the national emergency act. That means that Kamala, Bernie, etc can now propose new powers to enact their policy agenda using this act on things voters really care about like Climate Change, Gun violence, etc. without Congressional appropriations. First 100 days guarantees are pretty strong now for the Dem candidate with these new powers SCOTUS just awarded to the presidency.
You definitely are playing dumb now. A long drawn out legal battle where it was found that Google was not at fault and admitting to it but still ultimately persisting it's Google's fault for the hack to his site is called a vendetta. It's called having a conflict of interest. It's called having motivation to besmirch Google
Wow... you must be the professor. Because the history I posted shows that the professor might have a reason to go after Google (after having his web site shut down due to malware on the site and after his attempts to complain about Google to company executives, the media, and elected officials apparently got him no where. Hence, his political leanings didn't matter to me... he was upset that Google shut down his site and he decided to go after the company. Seems pretty clear to me. But hey, its a free country. I was pretty mad at Ford after my local dealer failed twice repairing the AC in my wife's Expedition. Maybe I should do a study on automobile companies? I could even testify in congress if I find a few congressman who have had bad Fords.
Assuming your correct...(and that's a HUGE leap).... How does that change the results of multiple experiments (which included the work of others by the way) , leading to a paper accepted by a world renowned institute like the National Academy of Sciences and who's results have been replicated by independent 3rd parties? Do you believe OJ was framed too?
Are you a professor of psychology though? I heard they are subject matter experts in mechanical engineering also.
Still not addressing the studies findings about Google accepted by the National Academy of Sciences and duplicated by 3rd parties. Duly noted.
I hear you and agree that once Trump is defeated the world will not go back to normal. I also agree with you that there are many people suffering. Just recently I was talking to a Trump supporter who is very concerned about whether he can retire. I can say I am actually benefiting quite a bit from this economy but it is one of the biggest ironies that rural and working class Trump supporters are suffering during record stock markets and low unemployment while urban white collar people like myself who make up a large part of Trump opposition are doing well. Any Democrat that wins will not mean the country magically changes on January 21st., the economy keeps on going, people have affordable healthcare, student debt is forgiven, Climate Change reversed and etc.. It will most likely take years and many of those problems might never be solved. The problem though is until Trump is defeated and out of office and Congress flipped none of those issues will come even close to getting resolved and if anything things will be worse. I understand the passion that Progressives have and the lack of inspiration that milquetoast centrists might engender. Passion doesn't mean that everyone will agree and go along with the direction of that passion. Trump rallies are incredibly passionate yet I doubt you, I or most of us here are swayed by Trump rallies, or at not swayed in the direction that Trump wants us. As many has said before this isn't about winning the national vote and especially not about winning states like California. Trump could lose the popular vote by 10% and still win. To win we have to win in many places where support for Democrats is marginal at best. There are many many people who don't like Trump personally and feel he is shady but feel they are doing good and don't want to rock the boat. There are many people who don't like Trump personally but don't like the idea of Socialism even more and are very leery when they hear about higher taxes and more regulations. If we're going to defeat Trump those are the people we have to win. Now you might feel these people are just selfish and shortsighted and only if they could become enlightened they would jump on the Progressive bandwagon. I don't think that is a winning strategy. My own view, from talking to people like I describe and even outright Trump supporters, is that we need to emphasize that Trump is a threat to the principles that underpin our democratic republic. Left, Center or Right I believe we all still believe in the ideas of Constitutional norms and that Trump is violating and outrightly hostile to those norms. We can acknowledge that have differences regarding many issues and those will have to be debated over but we can never hope to make honest progress as long as the country is led by a blatantly dishonest President and a compliant Congress.
You are confusing data with conclusions. No one is claiming that he generated false data that wouldn't be able to be repeated. His conclusion is biased and it's most evident in that he has determined that Google is explicitly biased in their search algorithms towards pro Democat sources not based on actually understanding the computer science algorithms behind them but rather just a statistical analysis of search results.
