Answers in Genesis and its “Christian” Users: Creationism and Web Privacy
This is literally unbelievable and a totally unscrupulous modus operandi by Answers in Genesis.
Cross-post by Professor James McGrath of Exploring our Matrix:
Answers in Genesis and its “Christian” Users: Creationism and Web Privacy
The “scare quotes” are not mine but theirs. P. Z. Myers has a post today about the way Answers in Genesis has been tracking who reads it and what else they read, and one of the categories is “Christian” Users.
Read Myers’ post for the full story and the relevant HTML script. And here’s a link to the original report.
Whatever one may think of other things Answers in Genesis has done, they have clearly accomplished one thing effectively: they managed to get the category “Religion” onto a list of those who use web-based tracking technology to violate the privacy of those who visit their web site. Otherwise the list would simply have included porn, media, news, shopping, and things like that. Thanks to AiG, “religion” also appears.
This is obviously a very serious matter. But among the more amusing aspects are the fact that Answers in Genesis’ tracking script categorizes those who visit other creationism-related sites as “Creationist Groupies,” and while the quotes may indicate doubts about whether those who visit other “Christian” sites are “Christian,” those who visit Joel Osteen’s site are placed in the category “Other.”
December 3rd, 2010 at 2:24 pm
What does it all mean anyway though?
December 3rd, 2010 at 2:33 pm
Put simply, they’re violating visitors privacy with specialised code on their website. This code grabs all of your Internet cache and is very naughty indeed.
December 3rd, 2010 at 4:43 pm
@ webmaster: I have to say that I’m neither shocked or suprised. The ethics displayed across the Creationist spectrum are consistently dreadful. From Michael Behe to jailed fraudster Kent Hovind, these guys seem to lie as easily as they breathe. Mike Behe’s evidence in the Dover case was plain embarrassing.
It’s a source of amazement to me that the ID people felt able to persist with their game plan once the Wedge document had been leaked. As for Ken Ham, I just love what P Z Myers says about his porn preferences!
December 3rd, 2010 at 8:19 pm
Cyberwar against whistleblower site continues apace.
December 3rd, 2010 at 9:45 pm
Hmm… Having read some of the comments on PZM’s post I’m wondering if this is all just a spoof which people are taking seriously. As written the code does not effectively achieve what it apparently sets out to do.
December 3rd, 2010 at 10:11 pm
Ah. Having now read through the original research paper I retract that last comment. But it seems that AiG is but one of very many sites that do something similar. It makes one wonder what other mischief is going on under our noses.
December 3rd, 2010 at 10:44 pm
Not surprised as all creationism is founded on a lie
December 4th, 2010 at 12:31 pm
@ Gioy: This is a big story and getting increasingly sinister. I only found out yesterday that the charges for which WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange is wanted by Interopol aren’t rape at all. Or anything that most of us would call rape.
To summarise, a condom broke. It’s all a bit biological, what my kids would call “too much information” so perhaps anyone who’s intrigued should find out the details for themselves.
It seem that under Swedish law, having sex with someone and, for whatever reason, even potentially putting them at risk of a sexually transmitted disease is an offence. It’s this that they’re after him for, not what I’d call rape. It all looks totally bogus to me.
December 4th, 2010 at 10:02 pm
Colour me thoroughly unsurprised.
Those that still wish to paint these guys as downtrodden underdogs need to have a good long think.
Which is admittedly asking a lot of some creationists.