Google Analytics

I came across a very handy tool put out by Google, well, I think it's pretty cool!

From what I understand of it, you place a small snippet/tag in your websites code, and Google gets a snippet of information as each person/viewer comes to your page.
For the inquisitive mind, such as myself, I was intrigued to see from whence people came from to get onto my blog. Google Analytics allows you to see what continent your viewers hail from, as well as what sites people have just come from in order to reach your site.

It has helped to inform me of how much "pull" factor posting and being active elsewhere on the web has on people. Alot of the referrals to this site, for example, have been from people reading my comments on other blogs and subsequently making the jump to this one.

Not only that, it does up a nice dashboard with site statistics for you - I suggest checking it out!

https://www.google.com/analytics

Terraforming

This week I've been pondering what content it would do well to blog about.

It's a very interesting question, as every day I seem to have a vast array of varied ideas which may or may not appeal to various different people - so what should I blog about?

On the one hand,

it seems appropriate that a blog would have a branding - some common thread that holds the whole site together - yet what should this be? Could the author, him/her self, be the thread that binds the concepts and draws people back. Or, should the ideas be limited to a singular stream, allowing a particular blend of readership to find food for thought in areas they are interested.

Yet, on the other hand,

what necessitates a singular thread? Is not variety the spice of life? Further, it seems somewhat counter-intuitive to the diverse range of thoughts that I, as the author, have during a week - if I was to limit myself to one topic, it is likely I would make my blog more sporadic, with vast spaces between posts at various times. One need only look at my AI blog to see this in action.

So, my question to you is,

What is the most helpful - a blog targeted at a narrow readership with limited content which explores diversely a small field. Or, a blog with a diverse range of topics which allow the readers to pick and choose that which they find interesting, and to be directed to consider topics that they may not, as yet, have considered?

On Dawkins...

I, for many years, have followed the writings of many "atheistic" or, as Dawkins terms them, "nontheist" authors who, of particular note, were very anti-theist. This is not because I am one myself, but because, as an educated Christian, it has spurred me to understand Christianity better (ironic that!), and also, to be confident in answering the objections that a person might bring to me in regards to the authenticity of Christianity.

Curiously, I found myself today looking through some quotes from Dawkins, here is one:

"People sometimes try to score debating points by saying, "Evolution is only a theory." That is correct, but it's important to understand what that means. It is also only a theory that the world goes round the Sun -- it's just a theory for which there is an immense amount of evidence.
     There are many scientific theories that are in doubt. Even within evolution, there is some room for controversy. But that we are cousins of apes and jackals and starfish, let's say, that is a fact in the ordinary sense of the word."
-- Richard Dawkins, "Nick Pollard interviews Richard Dawkins" (Damars: 1999)

Whilst eloquent, Dawkins has actually made a fundamental mistake in his logic, at the end of this blog, I hope you will understand why.

The consequences of too much TV...

Well, time to turn the first sod on this here virgin blog site, and what better way to do it than with a bit of humour eh?

I've spent some time today perusing the interwebs for some new blogs to follow, and so was looking through a blog on psychology/neurology, when I came across the following article:
Does TV watching really kill you?

The article talks about some of the findings of a study done by David Dunstan. The article, I felt, is well written, but the point of humour came when Dave points out some of the media reports on the study...
Take a look at http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-01/aha-stt010710.php

Now tell me, did you read anything there that seemed a bit bizarre?