Here.
I agree that Fishcrow's latest picture meets the quality standard established by Cornell's six-pixel Ivory-bill.
These ridiculous pictures help illustrate an important point--for some people, a fleeting glimpse of almost anything may qualify as a possible Ivory-bill sighting.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
21 comments:
Finding an IBWO in Fitzcrow's mustache is a fine illustration of how much the imagination can create in the presence of limited information. It's been a funny and powerful critique of the IBWO "evidence".
But this oh-so-serious discussion on Birdforum illustrates an even more devastating point...that not only can the imagination easily create this stuff... but that "reason" can pick it up and run with it. It's amazing to read.
When you look at this exchange, and consider what it must have been like for CLOwns first reviewing Luneau, it helps you understand how they found the six pixel bird. Gosh, how could they help themselves?
Tail feathers? I can't even find a bird in this blurred image! I do, however, see two ghost-like caricatures of human faces.
You fellows (and Amy) are still missing the obvious.
It's one big practical joke. It has to be. Nothing else, except sheer madness could possibly explain it.
And I for one, refuse to believe that so many mad people could ever gather together to focus on one extinct godlike bird.
Even the Alien is with me on this one, right Alien?
Isn't it time to comment on recent changes to the CLO website? Their "found" banner seems to have gone the way of the dodo (and the IBWO), and they now seem content to be merely part of "the search for" the IBWO.
Something frantastic has just happened! Apparently someone else has recently followed up on Mike's video and spotted a bird:
One of the people who recently saw the new footage was motivated to check out the area. He was there for one day and saw one of the birds. This was close to two of my sightings and almost precisely where I had a possible flyover in April. (Post #845 on the searchers thread - sorry I don't know how to get the link to an individual post)
No word yet, of course, on who it was or exactly what they saw (though I hear it's coming down the world's longest pipeline soon). My money's on one of the Birdforum people to have resighted it. Maybe the always mysterious Choupique. In any case, this is the first alleged refound bird based on Mike's "sightings".
I agree with anonymous that Birdforum without Fishcrow just ain't Birdforum.
Now THIS is a joke, right?
This is just exactly what happened in the Cold Fusion debacle. The real scientists went away pretty quickly, leaving the absolute loony toon crazies arguing over excess temperature effects in their experiments.
Replace "excess temperature effects" with fishcrow's "thin-tailed Ivory-billed" and the circle is complete.
....or it's a great big practical joke.
You convinced me, these folks are either insane or it's a big joke. And we skeptics are the jokee. Even Cyberthrush seems to be yanking our chains.
When you look at this exchange, and consider what it must have been like for CLOwns first reviewing Luneau, it helps you understand how they found the six pixel bird.
CLO has set the bar for quality of IBWO evidence, and it's really, really, low. Fishcrow's stuff is every bit as good as Cornell's, so why shouldn't he believe that he has positive proof? ("Because he should have a marginal grasp on reality" is not an acceptable answer.)
Come to think of it, why does Cornell seem to think that their crappy evidence is better than Fishcrow's crappy evidence?
Today on BirdForum Fishcrow said, "The first time I heard double raps, there were two of them from short range. There was absolutely no doubt what it was."
Anybody who states that upon hearing two "double raps" that "there was absolutely no doubt what it was" has no idea what they're talking about. Mechanical sounds (and even songs and calls) are prone to error from a number of sources. For a survey, the error rate of sound ID is acceptable. For existence of a bird not positively documented in 60 years, it's worthless.
Marshal McCluhan has a wonderful synthesis of the "group think" phenomena for ongoing perception of the unusual: "I wouldn't have seen it if I hadn't believed it.”
Many field scientists, particularly in government, use this phrase when referring to observations by birders.
For anybody who is interested, you can get a real good view into how Fishcrow's birding mind works by reading this exchange which occurred after he reported a first state record MacGillivray's Warbler to the Maryland list server.
"I was referring to the fact that an adult male MacGillivray's Warbler
is trivial to identify. You don't have to get down to intricate details to identify this bird. Any birder who is beyond the training-wheel stage should be able to identify one at a glance."
This explains his IBWO sightings very nicely. Once he knows something, he is infallable. Be sure to also read the discussion on his previous identification of a Sedge Wren.
This guy has a persecution complex a mile wide, and has no interest in learning from more experienced people.
"Even Cyberthrush seems to be yanking our chains."
Yes, exactly. Of course, Cyberthrush would be happy just to get people to come to his blog. But he is clearly playing into the practical joke side of the equation. It is truly a group of merry pranksters, birdforum et al.
But fishcrow could be totally insane or totally the best practical joker of all time. I mean...he actually has people looking at what must be the worst blurry blob in the universe. And they are actually debating it. In fact, now I'm debating it!
My god, the guy is a mad genius practical joker! I'm in awe.
iggygrey:
In case you haven't noticed, the government (FWS) has stayed fooled longer than have experienced birders.
The images keep coming - now we have a left-hand IBWO and a right-hand IBWO. The right hand bird is the one with the long tail (lets call it a Long-tailed IBWO - an exciting discovery of a new species to science which has been all but ignored in the furore). Someone has suggested Ani. Assuming that ani is the plural of something else I think they were referring to Fishcrow and Choupique.
I know these are stills from a movie, but I'm sorry , I can't see anything at all !!!
My favorite quote (of the moment) from Fishcrow's website (re: the new video of 2 IBWOs):
"I have no recollection of that instant, but it is possible that I caught a glimpse of movement as an ivorybill flew in to the position on the right."
I have no recollection of the night of the murders, but it is possible that I was jumping over chairs in an airplane terminal at the time.
To the practical joke hypothesizers:
Why would you believe that Fishcrow is pulling a practical joke, but that the CLO is not? Why isn't there a gigantic complex practical joke conspiracy going on between CLO, TNC, Remsen, Fishcrow, Arvin, Fred Collins, Kullivan, Fielding Lewis, Mary Scott, Luneau, Sparling, Thibodeaux & Boudreaux, NASA, USFWS, and the U. S. Navy? Not to mention various other conspirators in South Carolina, Florida, etc.
It's not a joke, it's just stupidity, mass hysteria, paranoia, fame, glory, and egos run amok.
"Why isn't there a gigantic complex practical joke conspiracy going on between CLO, TNC, Remsen, Fishcrow, Arvin, Fred Collins, Kullivan, Fielding Lewis, Mary Scott, Luneau, Sparling, Thibodeaux & Boudreaux, NASA, USFWS, and the U. S. Navy??
That's easy. Just look at the Sagan quote at the top of this blog. To believe that all of them are in some big conspiracy would be an extraordinary claim.
No, there is only one extremely mad or extremely talented practical joker in the bunch. It is fishcrow. (and Cyberthrush just tags along to promote his blog)
sheer madness.
There once was a bloke from the navy.
Caught a fever that made him quite crazy.
With footage like hell,
he's the spawn of Cornell.
Lord God Bird rolled over, screamed "Save Me!"
Post a Comment