This isn’t the blog you’re looking for

A while back I did a compilation of some of the weirdest search terms that led people to this blog. Meg’s been tweeting some more weird ones lately, so I decided it’s time for another compilation.

To the person who found us by searching on “how to cheat in your comprehensive exams”: I recommend bluffing instead. Universities have rules against cheating, but bluffing is totally kosher. So whenever a faculty member asks you a question, use one of the following answers:

  • “That’s an interesting question. What do you think?”
  • “That’s classified. I could tell you the answer, but then I’d have to kill you.”
  • “I plead the fifth.” (note: this answer is only valid in the US)
  • “Forty-two.”

Someone found us by searching on “Robert MacArthur was sexy ecology”. Presumably the word “ecology” was included to limit the search to this Robert MacArthur as opposed to others. I leave the judgment of his sexiness to you. And while I did once suggest that ecologists needed to get over him, I didn’t mean it in the way that you need to get over someone you once dated but still find attractive or anything like that.

Speaking of sexy, someone found us by searching on “sex field”. Really, Google? Someone searches on “sex field” and you send them here?

I’m vaguely disturbed by the fact that someone found us by googling “eo wilsons street address”. I mean, I know my post was pretty critical of his recent editorial–but I don’t want anyone to stalk him!

To whoever found us by searching on “is there any device out there for detecting wildlife”: yes.

I’m kind of annoyed that someone found us by searching on “i am not an ecologist”. Shouldn’t our blog come up last in the results for that search?

To whoever found us by searching on “why have ecologists been ambivalent about science”: we’re not!

To whoever found us by searching on “technology and ecology cannot coexist. what do you think?”: well, technology is what allows this blog to exist, and this blog is part of ecology. So technology and ecology can coexist. QED. Ipso facto. Multa novit vulpes.

To whoever found us by searching on “how much does it cost to submit to ecology letters”: they’ve become so popular that they’re charging authors just to submit?!

To whoever found us by searching on “how much fieldwork do ecologists do”: Where is this “field” I keep hearing everyone talk about? Doesn’t it get crowded, what with thousands of ecologists all crammed into one field? And why do people go there, when they could get data in the lab?

Someone found us by searching on “jeremy fox flip flop”, which I don’t understand. I don’t wear flip flops. Now, “jeremy fox axe”, that I could understand.

I love that someone found us by searching on “ecology is the most interesting aspect of all the sciences”.

Someone found us by searching on “jeremy fox bottoms”.

5 thoughts on “This isn’t the blog you’re looking for

  1. Pingback: This isn’t the blog you’re looking for: Parasite Version | Parasite Ecology

  2. Heh. I tried a version of “That’s an interesting question. What do you think?” in my prelims… It didn’t go over so well.

  3. And then there was the one I found depressing, “positive things about ecology”. Are positive aspects of ecology hard to think of?

    • That one’s probably because of the post I did on “ecological success stories”. Either that, or it’s because this blog is the most positive thing about ecology there is! 😉

  4. Pingback: Flumptrulecent | BioDiverse Perspectives

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s