I agree with very little of this paragraph:
The principle investigators from the Cornell Lab of Ornithology and their colleagues have been thoroughly professional in the scientific rigor with which they have been conducting surveys, analyzing data, and presenting results. The video evidence was presented in Science, one of the most reputable of peer-reviewed journals. Additional analysis of historical information and audio evidence has been thorough. The investigators’ actions have been transparent and all of this information is available to the public. Jackson’s criticisms of the work are not supported by the available scientific evidence and editors of The Auk apparently did not follow standard scientific review procedures.
Posts
7 comments:
Good! My team is circling the wagons. The indians are firing arrows at us but we still live.
The calvary will save us. (or a good photo)
Signed,
The True Believer
After reading that article I got the impression that the ABC had singled out Prof. Jackson as being the sole impetus for the increased skepticism surrounding the so-called IBWO rediscovery.
If anything I found his article in The Auk to be level headed and grounded in true scientific reasoning. The reason his criticisms aren't supported by the available scientific evidence is because there is very little "science" involved in the scant evidence Cornell has put forth so far. The only bit of evidence that's irrefutable is the individual sightings by the researchers themselves. I take them on their word and I trust that they know what they have seen.
"We encourage you to support the partners involved in Ivory-billed Woodpecker recovery, not blindly or without healthy skepticism, but with appreciation for the honesty and competence with which they are doing difficult work in the face of negative publicity."
I don't think that Prof. Jackson said or did anything contrary to the above. No one involved in this endeavour should be maligned.
If mistakes were made now is the time to admit them. Only then can everyone truly work together for a common cause which is and always was the habitat and the IBWO.
"The truth is out there."
Fenwick & Pasley are old school Noonan TNC'ers back in the day that Mellon money was all that was needed to run the table ... ABC exists only because NFWF and CLO toss them a bone now and then if they turn on Fitz et al they are basically "out of business".
Fitz is calling in favors.
These are hardly people who have ornithological credentials.
For these people to ask Jackson to author the BNA entry on IBWO and then freeze him out as "not a team player" is a joke.
The true beliver is just a patsy for old TNC types who couldn't hack the young turks.
Not only that but they are pissed that Sibley buried their bird book.
Still waiting for Prum to wade in about the "professional treatment".
Gorman are you awake yet? Wake up James Gorman wake up ... only you can do the right thing here. Or are you in someone's pocket too??
Dear True Believer,
You are more fun in this incarnation, rather than another non-believer.
I am not one to pick, but, um, one problem. Methinks you meant to write CAVALRY (dudes on horses that come to save you) not CALVARY.
Calvary is a depiction of the crucifiction of Jesus, or the name of the hill he was crucified on. The mistake presents an unfortunate metaphore for Cornell's current position. The slip, however, may be accurate. They may need to sacrifice someone to pay for the original sin.
These boys need a graceful way out of this, but given the absurd ABC post, they seem to be unable to see that.
Oops. I hate it when a Skeptic is right.
Signed,
The True Believer
Fenwick and his anti housecat crusaders have given the media the leade.
One one hand they PRAISE "SCIENCE" for being one of the most respected journals in science ... implying if you can make it there you can make it anywhere.
But then when it comes time to dress down the nations leading authority on IBWO - J Jackson, they accuse AUK of not peer reviewing his op ed.
The idea that science ran that clap trap video voodo in the first place should be enough to have James Gorman so far up their colon with his steno pad that he could author his own paper on their polyps ...
But it is the height of contempt for science itself for Fenwick to suggest that Jerome Jackson's opinion does not stand on its own as the peer review that the original Fitz et al paper never got when they bamboozeled Kennedy in the first place.
See Tom Nelson's perma link to "peer review".
This bunch of ____ has a meeting in Atlanta in early September to "finalize" the Ivory Billed Woodpecker recovery plan that guarantees the continued flow of the money. I commented on their plan or lack there of with suggestions and no response. I asked to attend their meeting. Their response was "we cannot see how your participation will help us finalize the recovery plan". And these folks are paid big bucks with my money. They pass big bucks to Cornell. Things stink in the swamps of Arkansas.
Post a Comment