Posted on 02/24/2020 5:01:18 PM PST by daniel1212
As we see Google increasingly becoming both politically correct in what it provides as search results (and I have not found other search engines to be much better), as well as (it seems to me) favoring pages that provide brief, cursory info (likely due to mobile devices), then I want to create a custom search engine for conservative (mainly political/ideological) issues, which Google enables one to do.
And which is relatively easy to do, and here it is as of now, https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=011383487679067898861:gug5bh6z5ol (look for search bar in top left corner). That is the public URL, though Google provides a code to include in a web site.
Below are all of the sites currently included (though I expect to add more). Although it seems to search all after adding them, yet only the first ten are included as being "Available in Site Restricted JSON API" which seems to be mean a "Limit of 10,000 queries per day."
www.freerepublic.com https://www.breitbart.com https://thefederalist.com https://cnsnews.com https://www.americanthinker.com https://theconservativetreehouse.com https://townhall.com/ https://www.christianpost.com/ https://www.thegatewaypundit.com https://spectator.org/ https://freebeacon.com https://www.intellectualtakeout.org/ https://www.washingtonexaminer.com https://www.foxnews.com https://thehill.com https://pjmedia.com https://www.washingtontimes.com https://dailycaller.com https://www.politico.com/ https://www.thenewamerican.com/ http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org
Comments and suggest for others will be considered. Thank God for tools we have in countering liberal censorship, even though Google is a big part of the latter.
Note also that you can do a Google site search by putting site: before the url, such as site:www.freerepublic.com
I made a custom search for evangelical apologetical searches, which I incorporated into my web site home page (public URL: https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=011383487679067898861:d5mux31ku3h.
Here is one list of top conservative sites, yet it leaves out the #1 CONSERVATIVE NEWS AGGREGATOR; FR.
https://www.libertynation.com/top-20-conservative-news-sites-to-read-in-2020/
Searching "homosexuality and the bible" (without the quotes) will reveal this. Search engines which show homosexual sources in their search results for that phrase testify to them being programmed (directly or indirectly) by those who lack this discernment or favor liberal sources.
The following provides results for that test (top 15 results) from many search engines.
https://www.google.com/search?q=homosexuality+and+the+bible&ie=UTF-8: only 2 of the the top 15 results take the Biblical position that homosexual relations are condemned as sin (as with all fornication) while 1 provided a two-sided debate.
Meanwhile the rest (12) favor the typical prohomosexual sophistry, from admitting that Biblical tests forbids homosexual relations but asserting that Jesus was mistaken, or that such do not apply to loving homosexual relationships, or even that sexual prohibitions in the Bible were limited to that culture, and or other sophistry, which includes the Wikipedia page on homosexuality and the bible (as of now).
And nowhere out of the 50 results shown is perhaps the most extensive examination and refutation of the these prevaricating prohomosexual polemics on one web page (http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosex_versus_the_Bible.html) shown, though I may be a little biased as being the author of it, by the grace of God.
Top results in https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C22&q=homosexuality+and+the+bible&btnG= are even worse.
And this is even with me being signed into and with use "Private results" checked off in the search setting page! Meaning Google insists on pushing what it should well-know you oppose.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=homosexuality+and+the+bible&t=h_&ia=web does some better, but it still a majority that proffer prohomosexual polemics or are in divisive.
https://search.yahoo.com/ is somewhat the same (from what I saw, amid many advertisements), providing 4 results supporting the Biblical position (besides Yahoo answers) while the rest were pro-homosexual (6), and couple trying to be rather neutral, plus advertisements to round out the 15.
https://www.yippy.com/ shows almost a duplicate of yahoo results, but without the ads.
As does https://www.dogpile.com
Likewise https://swisscows.com/
Also https://gibiru.com
https://yandex.com (Russian) was the only one ot two search engines to provide a (bare) majority of results that support the basic Biblical position, although it also provides almost as many proffering the prevaricating polemics. And it was the only one to provide the most extensive examination and refutation of prohomosexual polemics referred to before,but indirectly as posted on https://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_the_Bible.
https://www.bing.com/ actually posted Leviticus 18:21-22 and 1 Timothy 1:8-11 on the top of the search results! After that it lists a slight majority supporting the Biblical position though you need to go to a second page to get most of the results.
In contrast, using the custom apologetic search (https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=011383487679067898861:d5mux31ku3h) I compiled (thank God) results on all the pages supporting the Biblical position.
Using the custom conservative search (https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=011383487679067898861:gug5bh6z5ol) mostly results in pages reporting news on the issue, as well as expressing conservative concerns and opposition to the homosexual agenda.
I believe more tests would also show a clear bias overall toward the liberal side not only on moral issues but political as well. And while I am not advocating a custom search as a replacement for standard search engine pages, yet I believe a custom search as offered here can be viable for many.
Again, thank God for all tools we can use for good to the glory of God.
Bing doesn’t do what google does.
Custom conservative search page: https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=011383487679067898861:gug5bh6z5ol
Sites included as of now:
www.freerepublic.com
https://www.breitbart.com
https://thefederalist.com
https://cnsnews.com
https://www.americanthinker.com https://theconservativetreehouse.com
https://townhall.com/
https://www.christianpost.com/ https://www.thegatewaypundit.com
https://spectator.org/
https://freebeacon.com
https://www.intellectualtakeout.org/ https://www.washingtonexaminer.com
https://www.foxnews.com
https://thehill.com
https://pjmedia.com
https://www.washingtontimes.com
https://dailycaller.com
https://www.politico.com/
https://www.thenewamerican.com/ http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org
As far as privacy is concerned perhaps, and https://duckduckgo.com is promoted as being a better alternative on that issue. However, I am addressing bias and poor search results.
It has been awhile since I have tried it... I have not used Google since I did a couple years ago, but I highly recommend trying a side by side comparison on Google and Duckduckgo and check the results for yourself... open two windows and use any search term you like, but it is especially obvious with anything political.
Bookmark
I’m talking about bias and search results.
Yes bing doesn’t protect privacy. But it doesn’t give you left-wing anti-christian anti-american propaganda.
Oh my! Thank you so much! I gave it a brief test drive and it looks excellent. We’ve been needing this for a long time; you done good, daniel212.
It is better, but if you read my 1st post you would see that in my test then it were not were different on a most basic issue.
It is better, but if you read my 1st post you would see that in my test then it certainly did proffer left-wing anti-christian propaganda on a most basic issue.
Well, hardly any responses, and most ignore the comparison test I did which actually took the most time. I thought most responses would be about why such and such a site was left out.
Great idea!
Yeah I should have kept reading, but my point was simply that it does not even need to be a conservative issue (or Biblical/Christian as in your example) to be able to see their bias...
I really only responded because you mentioned Google so much and I hate to see anybody using Google to search for anything, You or anybody else reading the comments, because they try to control what you learn about literally anything, not to mention, listing paid results at the top of their search results.
However, while Google shows the most liberal bias - despite them knowing I am conservative - yet others are not too much behind, and only Google (TMK) enables one to create a custom search engine using preferred sites rather controlling what you learn, and which custom search is the subject of my thread. As for ads, Google makes it clear what they are, and they are very few, and nothing compared to Yahoo!
I read it twice now. You may want to take a writing class
Or proof read, esp. due to my arthritic fingers. It is far from polished or concise, but what is it that you find hard to understand?
ahh geez, not this again. FR people tend to know how to post here and maybe check their email but want to come up with the next search engine or social network.
It takes years to get a search engine to give good results and it takes something new and exciting, to start a social network.
Me thinks thou doth protest too much. As stated, this is not a replacement for a search engine, but it is simply a search page in which you can search many of the sources the articles on FR come from, and a little more, rather than the typical liberal sources that search engines show.
Thus I think that using the custom conservative search page to search something like "Buttigieg equality act" (without the quotes) will provide better results than a standard search. I may have to remove politico though, since too many results sometimes from it.
I understand that. I often have typos.
For me it was the structure and flow. Not sure what the point was. And what search was good or bad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.