We’re Number One!

Some google searches that bring people to Times and Seasons, along with the google rank of the site.

“Times and Seasons”: #1 on the list of google results. (i.e., if you go to google and type in “Times and Seasons” we’re the first result that comes back.)
LDS blog: #1
(But only #3 for “Mormon blog“!)

Mormon Lizard Men: #2
Mormon philosophy: #4
Mormon Sunday School Lesson: #5
Mormon law: #7
Mormon sugar beet: #10

Fondue tanners: #1

Well at least we’ve got the important areas covered! (Mostly — though we’re only #2 for Mormon chupacabra).

So, which good ones am I missing? (Is there a program or a site that will reverse-google and
find out what searches list your site?)

30 comments for “We’re Number One!

  1. Howie
    November 1, 2005 at 6:30 am

    pharisaical Mormon Blog: #1!!!!!

    Beating out BCC by a nose!

  2. November 1, 2005 at 8:36 am

    Just so people know, a Mormon Stake president is going to appear on the Today Show this morning to talk about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. This should be on real soon. I can’t find an online link but I believe the theme is “Mysterious Religions” and today’s segment just happens to be covering Mormonism.

    Sorry for the threadjack Kaimi.

  3. November 1, 2005 at 8:44 am

    Gospel of the Lizard Men.indd
    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – View as HTML
    Two Mormon boys across time and across the world. … Still, Lizard-Men speaking
    in tongues and. brandishing spears. That threw us all. for a loop. …
    http://www.bluekingstudios.com/images/Gospel_Lizard_Men_Med.pdf – Similar pages
    ]
    That is too much. ;)

  4. Elisabeth
    November 1, 2005 at 9:57 am

    I caught a snippet of the “Today Show” this morning at the gym. In response to Matt Lauer’s question about whether Mormons preach their religion as the only true church, I thought I heard the Stake President answer that the missionaries (in developing countries) offered Mormonism as an “alternative”, not as the only way to exaltation. Did anyone else catch this? Just wondered if I was missing something (like the a major doctrinal shift).

  5. RCH
    November 1, 2005 at 10:06 am

    @4 — I saw that. I think he was trying to say that missionaries don’t go into developing countries and try to browbeat or force people into believing, that instead they teach what they believe and allow people to exercise their free will to accept it or not. He was stressing the concept of agency more than the concept of absolute truth (which may not have been what Matt Lauer asked, but oh well).

  6. November 1, 2005 at 10:28 am

    RCH and Elisabeth, I had similar thoughts in some ways. He clearly didn’t want to stamp into the hearts and minds of others that we are intolerant or coercive in any way. I think Matt Lauer asked a specific question and Pres. Belnap answered another one, deliberately. In many ways, I think he made the right choice

    It’s interesting to see how the Today Show covers an issue so quickly with rapid-fire questions. Tomorrow they’ll have another 8-minute segment on Kabbalah and probably the next day on Scientology, etc. It’s so quick and so basic in its approach. But I think the Church was well-represented.

  7. November 1, 2005 at 10:55 am

    Hmm, lookee here

    conservative mormon blog

  8. November 1, 2005 at 11:04 am

    Remember this discussion? Are We Mainstream? Given the title of danithew’s Notes from All Over link (Have a question about one of these faiths: Mormons, Scientology, Kabbalah, Opus Dei?), I’d say apparently not, at least in the minds of the Today show producers.

    That’s ok. It’s all about GMA these days anyway..

  9. Adam Greenwood
    November 1, 2005 at 11:10 am

    Opus Dei is a religion? Kabbalah is a religion?

  10. November 1, 2005 at 11:29 am

    Kaimi, that reverse Google idea is brilliant. Somebody in the ‘nacle should make a killing off it.

  11. November 1, 2005 at 12:02 pm

    Adam, ask Madonna: Kabbalah is indeed a religion…

  12. john scherer
    November 1, 2005 at 12:08 pm

    Zelphblog is the #3 conservative mormon blog????

  13. November 1, 2005 at 12:12 pm
  14. Ben H
    November 1, 2005 at 12:14 pm

    Bryce, that is beautiful! FMH is also listed well before T&S on “conservative Mormon blog”!

  15. November 1, 2005 at 12:35 pm

    Does M* come up under “conservative Mormon blogs” at all?

  16. November 1, 2005 at 12:39 pm

    Fifth for mormon wal-mart blog and fourth for lds wal-mart blog.

  17. November 1, 2005 at 12:40 pm
  18. Adam Greenwood
    November 1, 2005 at 12:55 pm
  19. Measure
    November 1, 2005 at 1:32 pm

    #7 for “Fascist Mormon Blog”. Keep workin’ at it.

  20. Kaimi
    November 1, 2005 at 1:42 pm

    #1 onymous mormon blog
    #1 mormon group blog

    #6 hypocritical mormon blog. (BCC is #1!)

    (BCC is also number 1 for “polygamous Mormon blog. . . “)

  21. Kaimi
    November 1, 2005 at 1:46 pm

    Didn’t make the top 10:

    Strange Mormon blog
    Friendly Mormon blog
    Sexy Mormon blog
    Controversial Mormon blog.

    I’m so disappointed. On the other hand, maybe there’s a new tagline for us. “Times and Seasons — not strange, friendly, sexy, or controversial.”

  22. November 1, 2005 at 1:48 pm

    “Times and Seasons – not strange, friendly, sexy, or controversial.”

    We’ve found our niche.

  23. November 1, 2005 at 2:01 pm

    Just a note: Kabbalah isn’t a religion. Judaism is a religion. Calling Kabbalah a religion is like calling the Talmud a religion or calling Rabbinical exegesis a religion. Admittedly Madonna’s particular strain of Kabbalah is looked down upon by most traditional rabbis. So it’s probably closer to the Christian Cabbala of the Renaissance, I suspect. Whether that was a religion or not I can’t say. It’s in one of those blurry regions like Rosicrucianism or Hermeticism. I’d throw it into that general catch-all of New Age mysticism.

  24. maria
    November 1, 2005 at 3:21 pm

    Here’s the video link for President Belnap’s appearance on the Today Show:

    http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?g=dded84d3-974e-4c40-9fad-10519b5c21ce&f=email

  25. mardell
    November 2, 2005 at 8:42 pm

    #2 Mormon lawyers
    #9 Mormon freaks
    I am sure there are many more.

  26. Kaimi Wenger
    November 2, 2005 at 8:44 pm

    Re #26:

    But aren’t those synonyms, honey? (And by the way, what’s a cute girl like you doing on a site like this? ;) )

  27. Adam Greenwood
    November 2, 2005 at 8:46 pm

    A search for “Kaimi, stop wasting your time blogging!”

    http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLC,GGLC:1969-53,GGLC:en&q=kaimi%2C+stop+wasting+your+time+blogging

    We’re number one.

    For “Adam, stop wasting your time blogging!” we’re not even on the front page.

    http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLC,GGLC:1969-53,GGLC:en&q=adam%2C+stop+wasting+your+time+blogging

    Google has spoken.

  28. November 3, 2005 at 8:55 am

    LOL

  29. Zippy
    November 11, 2005 at 1:10 pm

    The Today Show did an adequate job touching on the Mysterious Religions series given the time constraints they appeared to be under. I was pleased with the responses that Pres. Belnap gave to all of the questions. He didn’t seem to be taken by surprise by any of them and thank heaven Matt Lauer didn’t ask about anything more controversial than plural marriage. My husband is not LDS and walked in on the last question that Matt asked Pres. Belnap concerning “when the LDS missionaries go into developing countries…”. My husband pounced on that with, “he didn’t answer the question”! He has the idea that the brethren sidestep difficult questions diliberately to avoid an awkward moment. My feeling is that the actual question was answered with a simple answer. There wasn’t enough time given to the subject to elaborate. I watched the segments on the other religions and thought to myself, “Ok, I’m an outsider who doesn’t really know much about these other religions and I’m not thinking to myself, wow, that guy didn’t answer that question. “All I know is just a little tiny bit more about a little known organization and its practices. How interesting this group does this thing or that group does that thing. I admit that sometimes I’d rather not have to deal with the uniqueness of our church with respect to it’s origins. On the other hand my husband kind of unwittingly caused me to look deeper and search further than I ever would have before I met him. But thats another topic.

Comments are closed.