I tutor a few kids, and one of them had to do a report on the future impact of the Global Oil Supply...so (on her own time) she types "Global Oil Supply" into google:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLD%2CGGLD%3A2003-48%2CGGLD%3Aen&q=global+oil+supply and on the first page, sees a perfectly good title: "The Future of Global Oil Supply"...
So she clicks on it...and look at what comes up:
http://www.internet-grocer.net/oilsuply.htmSo, she writes up a paper that uses this as the argument about why drilling in ANWR is great, blah blah blah...no oil crisis at all...Bush is great...all because the article said so...
Now, the kid is not political (most aren't)...but she found this and assumed that since it came up as a published article (on the first page of google), it was true...
but this article is pure crap...I ended up getting a few articles from the Department of Energy for her to read through, and showing her what they said compared to what the Ryter article said...
Then, carefully telling her that the Ryter article that she had was more about politics then science (I showed her how the writing wasnt how a real scientific paper would be written)...and that the facts were incorrect (by comparing to the DOE data on oil consumption, and oil supply being refined)...
so anyways, she is in the process of rewriting, and I think she'll do a good job (really nice kid)...but if I hadnt had shown her this, she probably would have just believed what she read...
As someone who does spend time helping these kids - learn, it really concerns me that this type of Republican (anti-science) propaganda pops up at the top of the list of keyword searches that they will use for research...
Because kids would naturally just believe it cause it is a published article...and its completely misleading - lies...and thats not good when they are so impressionable...