If the ivory-billed woodpecker was to make a last stand in North America, Scott Simon said the Big Woods of Arkansas was the perfect place.In my humble opinion, that comparison is ridiculous.
"We think of it as the Amazon of the United States," he said. "A big, wild, impenetrable woods."
Hopefully, you can click to enlarge the picture below.
The picture compares Google maps (using roughly the same scale) of America's Amazon and the real Amazon. America's Amazon is that tiny sliver of green under the green arrow on the left side. The real Amazon forest is that thousands-of-times larger green blob on the right.
I previously wrote about this subject here.
Posts
27 comments:
"America's Amazon" is a wonderful thing, to be sure.
I order books from them all the time.
Something occured to me by reading Tom first swipe at 'ol "talk to me via peer review Simon". The carpinterio observes that the skeptics need to get this whole "abnormal" pileated thing straight.
Tom Nelson has posted early and often that the "extra" white in the video as well as the "cluster" of sightings by reputable people might be because of these now well documented "abnormals" ...
This is a weakness in the whole skeptic claims since there is no "extra" white in the video - like sibley says this is a blurry video of a pileated (full stop).
Tossing in the "abnormal" plieated hypothesis only adds credence to the idea that the video is open to genuine debate about what kind of bird it is (again, 33.3 isn't perched, the measurement data in the paper is bogus, the flap rate data is bogus and the white on the flying wings looks exactly like a pileated) = Fitz et. al. have no evidence.
I guess the existance of abnormals might help explain why some people got confused when they SAW a large woodpecker, at a distance, etc ... but on balance using them as an "out" for these bogus claims is weak.
Lastly, Tom, pissing on Scott Simon because of his comparisons of Arkasas to Brazil is poor sportsmanship. You are on your way to having the birding community know you as the blogger who stood fast and said, " I don't see a Ivory Billed Woodpecker in this video" ... and then later had his views confrimed by the nations bird experts ... the crack in the dam was a blogger in MN ...
So don't go spoiling your accomplishments by poor sportsmanship and ancilliary lines of criticism. Maybe to Scott Simon the Big Woods are like the amazon - it is called a metaphor, he is not making a factual claim he is being "poetic".
And we can't fault a man that, can we?
1. "Tom Nelson has posted early and often that the "extra" white in the video as well as the "cluster" of sightings by reputable people might be because of these now well documented "abnormals" ..."
Wrong.
I've long stated that I think the Luneau video shows a normal pileated. Note this text, which has been at the very top of my Ivory-bill Skeptic home page for a very long time:
"I think it's likely that the observers were fooled by fleeting glimpses of abnormal Pileateds (these were seen in the area); I think the video almost certainly shows a normal Pileated..."
I still think it's a near certainty that some or all of the sight records involved abnormal Pileateds.
2. The "hot zone" where the alleged Ivory-bill sightings occurred is barely a mile wide , if that.
In my opinion, it's not a bit "unsportsmanlike" to challenge assertions that this area is in any way comparable to the Amazon.
Furthermore, Mr. RAY-al, I would humbly argue that Mr. Simon's Amazon comparison is more sales job than poetry.
Asking for donations to save "America's Amazon" is no doubt more effective than asking for donations to save "a strip of trees within hearing range of highway traffic, only a few short miles from a Taco Bell."
I don't think it's necessary to postulate that any of the "sightings" were abnormal pileateds. It think it well within the foolishness of man to mis-id normal pileateds as IBWOs.
It's just that simple. And certainly many of the players in this fiasco have shown themselves to be foolish, at least on this issue.
It was foolish to stake your reps on the silly video. It was foolish to not back off when challenged by Jackson. It was foolish to rebut Sibley. It was foolish not to include them all in the beginning.
Group think, a couple of bad mis-ids at the beginning, stubborn foolishness is all that is required for this story to have happened.
Does anyone still doubt this?
And as far as the "Amazon" claim, well America didn't invent marketing but we have taken it to new heights.
2. The "hot zone" where the alleged Ivory-bill sightings occurred is barely a mile wide , if that.
In my opinion, it's not a bit "unsportsmanlike" to challenge assertions that this area is in any way comparable to the Amazon.
But you're misinterpreting what Simon is calling "America's Amazon", and that's a bit unfair. I'm sure he's talking about the entire White/Cache river system, including the White River NWR, not just the Cache R NWR "hot zone".
Sure, there's a bit of marketing going on (I'd like to know if anyone referred to it as "America's Amazon" prior to 2004 to see just how much of it is marketing), but then again, if it was truly comparable to the Amazon in size, there would be no need to equate it to the Amazon, now would there? Instead of "America's Amazon", we could just call it "the White River".
... the crack in the dam was a blogger in MN ...
No disrespect to Mr. Nelson, but the crack in the dam was the lack of physical evidence. Sibley et al. would have happened whether this blog existed or not.
I'm confused. I thought the carpinterio real was a regular who would surely be familiar with Tom's well documented conclusion that the bird in the video is normal. Is this the real RAY-al?
Furthermore, Tom and other skeptics have good reason to suppose that certain sight records may have been of an abnormal Pileated rather than a normal bird. The original accounts of certain putative IBWO encounters indicate that the extra white observed was not pure white. The yellowish, off white, whitish, or buffy white color described in the accounts is consistent with the odd color present in photographed abnormal Pileateds and inconsistent with normal birds of either species.
Now that the skeptics, notably Tom and contributors to his blog, have discredited the identification as IBWO of both the sightings and video it is fully appropriate for him to address the misleading and self-serving statements by Scott Simon and other unrepentant opportunists making a mockery of bird conservation. Until the CLO, the TNC, and other IBWO stringers and opportunists show some degree of humility and repentance, many people far less thoughtful then Tom will justifiably continue "pissing on" them.
Nothing can spoil Tom's accomplishments to date, as the proud history of his blog will be preserved in internet archives for the benefit of future historians.
It would have been poor sportsmanship for Tom to criticize Simon and others had they already gracefully conceded their mistakes, but they have not yet done so and must still be held accountable.
Finally, we can indeed fault a man for making misleading sales pitches.
"Amazon of the United States" is hyperbole, while "Ivory-billed Woodpecker Persists in Continental United States" is merely false.
As a biologically relevant comparison, please consider the number of organisms endemic to the Amazon (countless!) vs. the White/Cache river system (very few at best among well known groups). There are certainly no bird species restricted to the White/Cache or even to the southern bible belt in its entirety (assuming as I do that all recent claims of IBWO from this area are bogus). Each of the relatively few bird species found in the White/Cache is equally or more abundant elsewhere, whereas the Amazon is divided into many distinct areas of endemism, each harboring dozens of bird species found nowhere else.
Like any good blogger, Tom not only stated his postition upfront but also allowed others a place to congregate and discuss.
Unlike other bloggers, he allowed comments from all comers. Not just believers. Not just Skeptics. That believers are few and far between on this blog is a sign of the weakness of their arguments. It wasn't always that way. The truth will out. And it's difficult to argue the believer's case anymore. Even TB has a hard time now.
Tom did all of this. Nothing more and nothing less. But that is everything.
I do have one other comment about this biodiversity crap. The world would be a sadder place without the remnant hardwood forest of this country. The great biodiversity of this earth is not because the Amazon exists. The great biodiverity is do because of the great diversity of habitats on this earth. From the barren sands of Saudi Arabia to, yes, the great Amazon Basin.
If the earth were completely covered in Amazonian rain forest, it would be a much less interesting earth to me.
Well, OK Tom, if that really is your name. I can see how you would feel slighted - I'll give it to you that your stance evolved to be consistent with sibley and Jackson and you are not as conflicted as I tried to claim.
However your first posting, where in you peek your head out from the mass of doting birders and say "where's the bird" isn't so full on confident of just how these abnormal birds figure in.
I'm not trying to say that you were wrong, as much as the overall skeptics case has these abnormal birds floating around in it in a way that is muddy.
In a discussion of the evidence, the abnormal birds don't come in ... just give me that once upon a time you weren't so confident of how the abnormal birds related to the video?
Can you give me that?
It is unsportsmans like to keep your best players in and not let your b team play in order to crush the other team. Of course Simon is "selling" he wants to ride this for all it is worth, build Arkansas up into the greatest trove of biodiversity in the world all so he doesn't have to pretend that some c student who started a hydraulic company and now buys and develops realestate and now sits on his board, didn't strong arm his development people into going along with a scheme to offer $10K for evidence of a bird that just a year ago was "documented" for faith certian by him and 17 others in SCIENCE ...
Let the man have a shred of dignity, we don't need to run them down and emasculate every hyperbole or superlative they ever uttered.
The facts are enough.
"Lastly, Tom, pissing on Scott Simon because of his comparisons of Arkasas to Brazil is poor sportsmanship."
Hmmm.... well I think the Amazon comparison was/is a bit over the top. I know what to do. How bout we compare it to some really really good second growth bottomland hardwood forests that I have seen?
Yeah, that's it. Some really good regrowth. I'll agree to go with that.
"I still think it's a near certainty that some or all of the sight records involved abnormal Pileateds."
I think this statement by Tom is interesting. As he says, at the top of his blog has been a similar statement for a long time. I always just figured it was a left over statement from the first days.
It wasn't unusual for us Skeptics in the first days to think...well it is CLO and their reputation is good so maybe they are just seeing abnormal pileated...but does anyone really still believe this. They documented one albinoish speciment pretty quickly. Unless we try to make a case that the sightings were of this bird, then forget it.
But really, I guess we will all have our opinions of this. I, for one, firmly believe that the existence of abnormal Pileateds is not necessary for either the sightings or the video. If you've been a birder long enough, you have seen crazier misidentifications than PIWO vs. IBWO.
Tom did all of this. Nothing more and nothing less. But that is everything.
Now who's guilty of hyperbole?
Mr. Nelson provided a forum for all of us who enjoy sitting behind our computers, but he didn't invent Ivory-billed skepticism. That sprung up independently from several sources in the birding world.
I'm confused. I thought the carpinterio real was a regular who would surely be familiar with Tom's well documented conclusion that the bird in the video is normal. Is this the real RAY-al?
I think it's the real Carpintero Real, but Tom must be playing with the name to somewhat expose who this person is - obviously a person who's first name must be Al.
"the crack in the dam was a blogger in MN "
Honestly, now.
Sibley, Prum, Jackson, et al. Hardly needed or received any prodding from Nelson to form their own opinions and open debate. This blog is journalism: informal, unedited, amateur journalism. That is not an insult; there is nothing wrong with informal, unedited, amateur journalism. It is an important part of the global conversation. But please, let's not get delusions of grandeur about ourselves.
"Sibley, Prum, Jackson, et al. Hardly needed or received any prodding from Nelson to form their own opinions and open debate."
Of course, I completely agree.
Here's what I posted in my "Skeptic Home" page many months ago:
----
For over two months after the April rediscovery announcement, I was a "believer" myself. I hadn't looked at the evidence, and I just assumed that Cornell had rock-solid proof. When I read that David Sibley had expressed some skepticism, I was inspired to examine the evidence for myself.
----
Tom
Most of today's journalism is amateur, non objective, opinionated, poorly edited work; so what's your point.
Just because it says The Arkansas Times or Gazetter it's better than our writing.
I don't believe it anymore.
"Just because it says The Arkansas Times or Gazetter it's better than our writing. "
I don't believe I ever said it was. Please reply to what I actually say, or not at all. Thank you.
"Please reply to what I actually say, or not at all."
Well, fellow, follow your own advice. In my original post, I never said that Tom was the first Skeptic.
I just praised him for providing a place for the rest of us. Yes, Tom did all of this. Nothing more and nothing less. But that is everything. You see, not hyperbole at al.
Listen Amigos if you all would make up "names" for your anonymous selves, like I have seen fit to do, this would be a lot more fun, and would allow me to keep track of all of this.
Besides, it allows you to write in the third person, as in "the Carpinterio thinks" ... which is very self important sounding and a heck of a lot of fun.
Also all this anonymous stuff isn't journalism, if it was pseudonymous then it would be journalism.
So get yourselves a pseudonymn.
I mean TB, did it, the alien did it you too can do it. Just radio button "other" and type your byline ...
Mr. Nelson provided a forum for all of us who enjoy sitting behind our computers, but he didn't invent Ivory-billed skepticism. That sprung up independently from several sources in the birding world.
Uh, yeah, and from a lot of "ordinary" scientists and skeptics who wondered why the fxck a bird that was "rediscovered" was being depicted as a wooden fxcking model in photos.
And then we went to look at the Science paper, it was stills from a crap video, "knocking noises" and .... nothing else.
I love nature but I'm not a birder by any stretch of the term. Frankly, far too many members of the "birding world" let themselves get strapped in for this ride.
When people make extraordinary headline grabbing claims in molecular biology they are either correct or they are knocked on their asses within a very short time, so much so that a Senator or two invariably feel like they need to get involved.
The case of the IBWO is different because it's really a matter of local impact, albeit one which attracts international interest because of the large and impressive size of the allegedly rediscovered creature.
There is no question in my mind that these facts were considered by the Cornell team when they rolled the dice. All we need is for someone in the Cornell star chamber to crack under the pressure and tell the truth about how little oxygen was in the room on the day they made their "findings."
the carpinterio
Listen Amigos if you all would make up "names" for your anonymous selves, like I have seen fit to do, this would be a lot more fun, and would allow me to keep track of all of this.
No kidding. Wassup folks?
Just make up a damn name and stick with it, at least for the friggin thread!
Simon's reference to the Amazon is justifiable in the context of trying to convey that the White River/Cache River system is big, relatively wild and damn hard to walk through. He clearly was not suggesting that the Big Woods area is similar in size to the Amazon. He was mearly trying to help those that have never been in them thar swamps conjur up an image of what this place might be like. And, of course, Simon (a biologist) knows that the there is no comparing the diversity of species in Arkansas vs. the Amazon. (Please note: conspiracy just ain't everywhere!). That said, the place is loaded w/ fish, bird, insect and plant species (it ain't the Amazon, but it ain't the Bonneville salt flats either). And, lastly, I'm more than willing to give the guy a break. Any of you ever try to raise money for an under-resourced Southern state that ranks near dead-last in dozens of leading indicators? Simon and his fellow Arkansan conservationists were working hard to conserve the best of that state long before the IBWO excitement began, and I'll be they will be working to conserve the same habitat long after interest in the bird dies down.
Post a Comment