Readers of this blog know that the intermediate disturbance hypothesis (IDH) is a zombie idea that deserves to die. And now users of Google and Wikipedia are increasingly likely to learn the same thing. If you search Google for “intermediate disturbance hypothesis” here’s what you see on the first page of hits (click for larger version):
That’s right, my TREE paper attacking the IDH is the first scholarly article to come up in the main list of search results! And a second link to the same paper comes up a bit further down on the first page of results. Thanks, internet! Sadly, my paper is not among the top Google Scholar hits–yet!🙂
And when you go to the Wikipedia page on the IDH, you find this:
Under “support and critiques”, there’s an entire paragraph devoted almost entirely to my TREE paper. I didn’t write it and don’t know who did. So thanks, anonymous Wikipedia contributor!🙂
The notion of local-regional richness relationships is another zombie idea. And look what comes up as the very first hit if you google “local-regional richness”:
Clearly, the defenders of zombie ideas need to start blogging. Because slowly but surely, zombie ideas are losing the war for the intertubes.😉
p.s. I really hope these results don’t reflect Google personalizing its search results for me. That would be a bummer. I don’t think that’s the case, because my post on the zombie local-regional richness relationship is the top hit on Bing and Duck Duck Go as well, despite my never having used either of those search engines before. But personalization of search results may in part explain why my TREE article is one of Google’s top hits for “intermediate disturbance hypothesis”, since on Bing and Duck Duck Go it doesn’t show up until a bit further down in the results.