Can modern systems be Paranormal...?

Kumar said:
Just show me how I should search on google:-

"one who dig pit for others falls into it himself" or

"Try try again, you will gain"
Click to expand...
Are you doing direct (though a bit crude) translations of proverbs from your native language? If so, do you actually expect them to exist?
 
Kumar said:
Just show me how I should search on google:-

"one who dig pit for others falls into it himself" or

"Try try again, you will gain"
Click to expand...

Well, for a start, and I know you're not a native English speaker, but you've got to get the English right.

It's a terrible thing for non-native English speakers that the vast majority of Internet posters are English speakers, and while it is far from the case that they all use correct English spelling and grammar, you'll get much better results if you do. For example, compare these results:

one who dig pit for others falls into it himself

"one who dig pit for others falls into it himself"

he who digs a pit for others, falls into it himself

"he who digs a pit for others, falls into it himself"

See the difference? The first, without quotes, gets you many pages that contain the words dig, pit, others in totally useless context. The second, with quotes, but with b0rked-up grammar, gets no hits at all. The last two, with correct grammar, get the best results, and by doing this I was able to find out that variously attributed as a Czech, Hungarian or German proverb.

It's hard, I know, when English grammar is so unlike your native language. But I'm sure that you would have got more hits if you'd actually searched in Czech. Use the Czech words, get Czech pages. Or see Googles language tools. You have to use the language correctly to get the best results. If in doubt, ask.

The correct English version of your second is "If at first you don't succeed, try try again".
 
arthwollipot said:
"he who digs a pit for others, falls into it himself"
Click to expand...
Mind you, Google seems to be getting a little confused:
Did you mean: "he who digs a pet for others, falls into it himself"
Click to expand...
By the way, for some reason your links to searches are just bringing up a blank Google search screen here. Is it objecting to me not being in Australia or something? I've noticed it redirecting me from google.com to google.co.uk on occasions recently. It works fine (still using google.com.au) if I paste the quotation in.
 
Uh, (gasp) no, I tried, but it seems to be doing some bizarro things to the url links. Now it's putting </br> tags onto the end.

Heck with it. Just C&P if you want to see the results.
 
arthwollipot,

Can you justify that whatever I want to search from google, I can get the same by putting it in inverted commas OR by without inverted commas with some extra efforts. I may also get some extra informations in open search. I usually don't get relevant information on close search. Anyway I will try first by closed search.

Thanks.
 
Now I'm wondering if Kumar has stumbled onto something truly astounding, here.

Has he, in fact, invented a new Logical Fallacy?

Or is this Argument by Googlefight really just an Irrelevant Conclusion?

I'm tending toward the latter.

Move along, nothing to see here...
 
I have been tending to steer clear of Kumar threads recently, finding them to be unproductive and annoying.

But if it wasn't for that damn curiosity tickling away at my head, I would have missed "are grapes sweat?"

Fantastic. Thanks, Kumar. Surely a more creative troll was never invented.
 
Kumar said:
arthwollipot,

Can you justify that whatever I want to search from google, I can get the same by putting it in inverted commas OR by without inverted commas with some extra efforts. I may also get some extra informations in open search. I usually don't get relevant information on close search. Anyway I will try first by closed search.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Well, I would guess that the reason you don't get very many results when you put your inquiries in quotes is that you use incorrect grammar. There is only one way of being right (in most cases). There are very many ways of being wrong.

The chances of someone else on the Internet writing "one who dig pit for others" are miniscule.

By "open search" you will find that the information you are after is in there, somewhere. Probably buried on page 56 of the results. But you will have to wade through a lot of mud to find the diamonds.

By "closed search" with correct spelling and grammar, you will usually find what you are looking for on the first page.

I know English is a hard language to learn, Kumar, but all your problems with search engines seem to come from the fact that your grammar is all up the creek.

For assistance I recommend The Internet Grammar of English.

PS. I will readily admit that I don't usually use quotes when I do a Google search. I'm not usually looking for a specific quotation, and searching using nouns and verbs usually gets what I want. I found the above link by typing english grammar, no quotes.
 
arthwollipot,

Thanks. You are not wrong in your posting. Anyway, "necessasity is the mother of invention". I usually don't need to search many pages. On the contrary, I sometimes get variations & other informations.
 
Mojo said:
OK.

And the other one.

You see? By putting the words in quotation marks to search for them as a phrase, I have eliminated 542,000 irrelevant hits from your first search and 30095 irrelevant hits from the second one.

Perhaps you could extend this approach to some of the Google searches you post.

Edited to add: Of course, once this thread has been indexed there should be a hit for "Kumar is intelligent" as well.
Click to expand...
While the forum was down I did a spot of research (OK, a couple of google searches, but I'm sure that counts as research in Kumar's book) and this has in fact come to pass. We now have 7 hits for "Kumar is intelligent" (all of them either from this thread or from other threads referencing this one) and 18 hits for "Kumar is an idiot." So I'm afraid that Kumar is still an idiot, by a majority of more than two to one. ;)
 
Well, I have to say that I, too, originally thought that Kumar's ridiculous posting style and ignorant, stubborn clinging to his tissue salts and homeopathic silliness was a cultural artifact and simple problem with language.

Now, however, I realize that he really does have some mental disability.

In short - this thread has proven, once and for all, that Kumar is, without a doubt, a complete and total idiot. Or, to clarify for Kumarian searches... Kumar is Idiot / Kumar = Idiot / Idiot Kumar Is / Kumar is Idot...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom