Nov 152011

The term “Lorum ipsum” may be unfamiliar to some. Roughly speaking, it’s nonsense text in Latin used in designing graphics, often for webpages. It’s especially useful when combined with photographs or illustrations, as it enables an overview of the page before the real text is included. Not surprisingly, Wikipedia gives a much more thorough description of lorum ipsum.

In the past Loren Coleman has been taken to task for including stories about unknown animals with images and text about 9-11 on the Cryptomundo blog. Critics, including myself, claim this is done for the simple reason of garnering hits to the Cryptomundo site.

On November 12 of this year Loren Coleman posted a blog entry to Cryptomundo regarding Nittany Lions. Evidently Coleman discovered some sort of association between cryptozoology and child rape, and was willing to publicize his thoughts on the subject. Frankly this was not surprising, as previously Coleman asked whether Osama Bin Laden was as tall as Bigfoot:

In his recent entry on Nittany Lions, Coleman seems aware that others find his actions reprehensible:

One does not need to be an “insensitive skeptic” to test whether Coleman’s musings garner Google rankings. Today I simply entered the term “Nittany Lion” into Google image search. The result is shown:

My result is that the sixth most popular Google search for “Nittany Lion” is for Cryptomundo.
Because Google ranks images as well as text it’s possible to garner hits to a site just by the use of images. Here in Seattle the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, a semi-defunct newspaper, often includes photo sets of scantily clad women, ostensibly as “news.” A regular Google web search for the term “Nittany Lion” returns Cryptomundo, but significantly lower than the image search, at least for me. In some cases the text surrounding a photo is less relevant for garnering hits than the photo itself, and thus becomes so much lorum ipsum, or in our case “Loren ipsum.”

No Loren, it’s not the skeptics that are insensitive, it is you and Craig Woolheater who continue to capitalize on human tragedy for the sake of profit and attention.

 Posted by on 11/15/2011 Opinion

  2 Responses to “Loren Ipsum”

  1. Tact? A firm distinction between right and wrong? Coleman possesses none of these traits.

  2. Once again, I am criticized for having multiple interests, an intrigue with the flow of current affairs interacting with various topics of concern to me, and a sincere desire to not be silent on some issues. I am a MSW, of course, and it is natural for me to be a writer on all matters that make me curious. It boggles my mind that “Skeptics” don’t understand this, and keep wrongfully (and mythically) stating that I “capitalize on human tragedy for the sake of profit and attention.”

    Blogs are expressions of one’s interests and more. I do not make any “profit” off of Cryptomundo. Damn it, as I’ve said before, I don’t get any advantage if there are hits there or not. I am not a director, owner, or administrator at Cryptomundo. From what I’ve been told by the owner, Craig Woolheater, he is barely breaking even with what it costs him to maintain the servers, but that is of no concern to me. I am a blogger there, nothing more. I don’t need that site for attention. And, to say it again, get no profit from there, whether people read my stuff or not.

    But, Matt, thank you for creating an intriguing title for your blog posting, which appears to demonstrate a misread of me. I shall hold your discovery and exposure of the “dermal ridges” as drying patterns in high regard, nevertheless. I mention it often when adding a bit of critical thinking to the discussion of such artifacts of plaster track casts.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.