Is it possible to identify the thread that has generated the fewest views on the SDMB (obviously excluding current threads)?
On the Advanced Search page (selected from the Search drop-down), one of the options for Sort Results by (defaulting to “last read” or something) is “Number of views.” It is probably possible to select this option to discover what you want.
HOWEVER,
I am not sure what a search with neither a search argument nor a poster would do to the hamsters, so I suggest you wait for more input before you launch such an action.
In order to bring this to the attention of people more likely to be able and interested to answer it, I am going to move this to ATMB.
tomndebb, I don’t want to cause a fuss, but does my question not have a factual answer? Anyway, the question might generate more interesting answers here, so thanks! 
The hamsters offered up an answer in 3.82 seconds (which is pretty fast for any search here).
There are 102 threads with 1 view and 0 replies.
Perhaps the saddest, and most lonely of these threads is Polycarp’s “A Visit from Woody Woodpecker”
-Well, it would be, except I just looked at it, and up its view count. 
Some of the older threads will have inaccurate view counts.
But this was from Poly’s early days on the board, when he was a mere poster like you or me!
How did you go about making a search for them?
Advanced search
Nothing in the text or user boxes
Find threads with: At most 0 replies
Posts from: Any date, and newer
Sort by: Number of replys, In ascending order
Thanks Squink. The thread titles make interesting reading! I noted that only two people have managed a single view thread post 2000. wachador52 managed it in 2003 while the most recent was scored by Achren in April of last year. It would seem a shame to tarnish the glory of any of these notable threads, so I left them in peace (save taking a peek at the Woody Woodpecker one! Which now has 50 views!).
In fact, I didn’t post something about “The Dailey Show” in Cafe Society one time. That probably wins for fewest views, since it had no views, and no posts, not even an OP.
OMG!! That was my favorite thread!! Thanks CK!
WOW! I didn’t too!
uuuuh, link please?
Here comes Chronos to show me just how gullible I am.
I clicked, I saw, I’m stupid.
Verily, here we see a demonstration of the Uncertainty Principle in action, for the act of observing a zero-view thread changes its status.
I swear, reading that innocent Polycarp birdwatching thread, and thinking of it disappearing without a reply and without a single soul on even bothering to read it, and lying dormant for lo these many years, and then being resurrected and given the posthumous attention it so richly deserved in life . . . I swear it brought a tear to my eye.
Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle strikes again!
Have you ever not posted something in MPSIMS? That’s where most of the unviewed stuff hangs out. Of the 100 or so 1 view, zero reply threads, 97 of them are in MPSIMS, 2 in Cafe Society, and 1 (just started today) in Great Debates. I’m happy to see that General Questions doesn’t suffer from unviewed threads.
On a related note, how exactly does the “views” function work? If I open and close a thread 30 times, will it show 30 views? (Assuming no others) Does it matter if I’m logged in? Does it record a view when unregistered (non-paid, and non-guest) readers view it?
I ask because I notice that when starting a thread, it automatically shows 1 view. I assume it’s mine. However, the other day, I read a brand spanking new thread (not mine), and noticed afterward, it showed only one view, after I had left and returned to the forum. What exactly constitutes a “view”?
Yes. Views are counted each time the thread is clicked on. The counter is not updated in real time. As far as I can tell, it is updated each time a view results in a reply, with other views being added in more or less hourly.