It's time for all the gutless ornithologists and "bird ID experts" out there to stop mumbling and grumbling. RemFitzsenPatrick has had every opportunity to back off and say "we blew it." But all they do is continue to up the ante everytime they are attacked. How about passing a resolution at the fall NAOC stating the position that the Luneau video is not an IBWO, and demanding retractions of certain pubs? I don't understand why this should be allowed to just die down without some serious repercussions for the main proponents.Obviously, this whole mess is a monumental embarrassment to many conservationists and birders. I would argue that dragging this farce out is not really in anyone's long-term best interest.
I believe that many of you are afraid that somehow, somewhere, a real IBWO is going to be found and then you'll look like idiots. A real rediscovery is not something to be afraid of, it's something to hope for, actually. But the AR "rediscovery" is a complete sham and should be treated as such.
Getting Cornell's ridiculous Science paper retracted would be a major first step in any recovery effort.
It seems that logic and tiptoeing around are not working, so what's the best way to force the issue? Is the "resolution at Veracruz" idea above a feasible one? Should respected birding names start openly calling for a retraction? Any thoughts are appreciated...