The Google illusion

Just out of curiosity I “Googled” “Paul and Mike McCartney twins” to see if anyone else had tripped on this information. I went ten pages in, and found not a hint. Even as it was hidden in plain sight, meaning many thousands of people out there must know about them, the Google just doesn’t seem to know.

The Google is just another illusion, designed to make it appear that you have free access to ideas. It is perhaps one level deeper in thought control, as you think you are accessing the world, but … not. Google, a campus in Silicon Valley, is not into freedom of speech or exploration of new ideas. Quite the opposite. They merely exist to give us that impression.

They are Intel. I quit using them several years ago when they announced that they keep track of any searches I do for “advertising” purposes. I use Bing. But I am no fool. I have never thought for a second that Bing and Google are separate operations. They are merely Democrat-Republican, Microsoft-Apple,  Coke-Pepsi. Bing is tracking me too, and if ever I refuse to pay my taxes or decide to run for office, they can mine my data and find out all about me.

Fortunately, I do not matter. As with all of those thousands of others who easily figured out the McCartney twins, we remain anonymous.

About Mark Tokarski

Just a man who likes to read, argue, and occasionally be surprised.
This entry was posted in American wilderness. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to The Google illusion

    • It is possible that the story we are told about Palestine being without Palestinians when Zionism was introduced it true, as I wasn’t there and so cannot know what is true without undertaking a large project. Not interested.

      I tend to view Zionism as a hugely dishonest enterprise designed to create a Aussie/USA-like European colony in a land occupied by non-Europeans. Similar efforts are underway in Zaire, with depopulation efforts undertaken to put that country’s rich store of resources under control of Americans and Europeans. It is ever ongoing.

      Anyway, Swede, your photo essay is not proof of anything, not even strong evidence, as we don’t know what we do not see, and don’t even have a good idea of what we do see in the photos.

      Like

      • Big Swede says:

        WE believe what we want to.

        Video’s of crashing jets and such.

        Like

      • The pictures could be of anything. That they say the pictures show an empty Palestine is not even mildly good evidence. They could be of Syria, Egypt, or India for matter. It is terrible evidence. Objectively, the pictures are worthless. Credible eyewitness testimony, public records that are real and original – that sort of thing would serve your case better.

        I kind of chuckle when I say things as I am about to, as I know that hardly anyone reads anymore, but I got my best evidence so far of the state of affairs in Palestine prior to 1948 from Benny Morris, from his book Righteous Victims. The reason I think it is good evidence is that Morris is a Zionist, and therefore almost has the status of hostile witness, and therefore more likely to be honest. He admits the presence of a large Palestinian population there prior to 1948, and the means by which they were expelled. Norman Finkelstein is a man after my own heart, and as thorough a researcher as exists. He’s written on the subject too.

        My views on what happened on 9/11 are based on evidence, and TV videos are easily faked, so that evidence is suspect. Couple that with the fact that the physics presented by the videos is impossible, and that is strike two. Couple that with no credible eyewitnesses to jets flying over, strike three. Couple that with no debris from any planes, strike four, and I need a new metaphor.

        Now tell me, what is ideological about any of the above?

        Like

        • Big Swede says:

          Amazing how quickly you jump into the weeds.

          If I could line up most of your theories of JFK, 9/11, CIA in So. America, Cuba, GITMO, Abu-grab, Israel, Boston and San Bernardino bombings, TP shortage in Venezuela…etc. they’d all come down left on the ideological scale. Macro observations versus micro, wouldn’t ya think?

          Of course clouding or complicating matters into some giant web of complex idiosyncrasies is also a leftist tactic.

          Like

        • Convenient for you – you get to define ideology however you want. Exactly what is my ideology then?

          Like

  1. Big Swede says:

    Simple and plain spoken explanations seem to carry a greater weight in debates.

    Like

  2. Luckyman says:

    “WE believe what we want to.”

    Very true for a majority of people and very ironic/revealing given the following comments inferring everything is left/right, black/white, evil/good, wrong/right. For those few of us who don’t need to be “right” about everything but have a desire to seek and know truth we only “believe” until shown to be wrong vs. those who “believe what we want to”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s