that doesn't make sense. why would that be proof of anything? why would they do a relevance search based on the text of their own generated pages, much of which is just template and links to reuters stories, instead of over the raw data they used to generate that page?

edit: I'm not asserting that this is on purpose or not, I'm just saying that that "proof" demonstrates nothing.

That proves absolutely nothing. You talk as though you have a clue about search relevancy, but that's clearly not the case.