In the end, I think the whole Ivory-bill controversy really boils down to one thing: finding an active roost hole. Back in the '30s and '40s, these roost holes were found many times, and high-quality evidence was gathered there. If any birds still survive today, someone will find an active roost hole, and indisputable, high-quality photographic evidence and sightings will quickly follow.I've heard a lot of detailed rumors about the alleged Florida IBWOs, and none of them contain any mention of a located roost hole or high-quality photographic evidence.
Inspired by Cornell, are reputable people actually poised to announce Ivory-bill "proof" based only on a flimsy "body of evidence" such as the usual unsubstantiated sightings, blurry photos/videos, double-knocks, kent-like calls, bark scaling, etc?
Posts
11 comments:
Wow that is a blast from the past ... back when Nelson was the lone voice crying in the regrowth, no commenters, just him and cyberthursh ... mano y mano in cyperspace.
Sibley hadn't happened, the explorer's club awards had not been hung around those black tie clad adventurers.
Prum was hiding under his desk after recanting and saying "something about the new double knocky" ...
those were the good ol' days. the way Guy Clark sang about them ...
The old birder stared into the sun
and relived the days of living by the gun
when deadly games of pride were played
and living was mistakes not made
But now the field is getting crowded ... germans with no sense of irony, foresters, alien's, Skeptics that play the TB on the skeptic blog, the skeptics swinging at rumors about rumors of insufficent evidence, perhaps even making up rumors just so they have something to swing at since James Gorman cancelled his feed to the blog (say it ain't so Tom).
The carpinterio thinks this whole thing is circling back to the St. Joe land deal, Watercolor and the P200 monies, the departure of sr. TNC gunners to work the deal and the Florida TNC trying to out do the Arkansas TNC and their PR staffs ...
it was simpler back when it was just tom standing in the street before it was paved ...
"...since James Gorman cancelled his feed to the blog (say it ain't so Tom)."
It ain't so .
Great bit of nostalgia C.R. It's been said by Tom and many others so many times, but it doesn't seem to penetrate outside of this forum--this is about corroboration and verifiable evidence. The cybersquabbler uses Republican tactics to try and shift the argument to a debate about whether the species is extinct or not. This is like bringing up gay marriage and flag burning amendments just before an election--not relevant and bound to incite and inflame. This is not helpful. This tactic appeals to the emotions and hopes, hopes that the species is not extinct. But we are mostly rationalists and realists on this blog, including the forester, alien, TB (in their heart of hearts!), and even the German (entspann dich!).
Cornell clearly misidentified the bird in the Lunneau video and misrepresented the other "evidence." This is an independent event that has created a situation exactly as depicted by Tom, one in which people don't critically evaluate the evidence and are inspiried, even emboldened to link every sighting into one big "body of evidence." By now, people ought to know that there simply must be diagnostic corroborating evidence.
There are dozens of cases of reasonable descriptions and reports, and in each case a failure to confirm or corroborate the claim. Kulivan's description leaves no doubt that he was "describing" an Ivory-bill. What are we to make of it? Some say he either saw it or made it up. But in his case and that of Mary Scott's, whose description is likewise reasonably good (and both better than the Cornell encounters!), the observers may simply believe that they saw an Ivory-bill. They simply believe the characters that they saw. This isn't faith, it's just typical human behavior. And this whole affair surrounding the Ivory-bill is such a typical human endevor with bias, bullying (Jerry Jackson didn't deserve that whipin'), and territoriality (Cornell vs. Auburn, whose gonna have the rights to publish and control the information with NDAs, etc.). We'll just have to wait and see what develops, hopefully clear evidence so we can all rejoice.
People talk of "rumors" in the plural. But all I have seen is one rumor (singular), repeated and repeated and repeated. Repetition does not imply credibility. The parts of this singular rumor that seem inconsistent are uniform across it recurrences: remote river/Florida panhandle, nine pairs/no good photos/only one or two observers. To me this says it all stems from one source, and that this source is already a few layers removed from the true facts. The only thing that seems clear is that SOMETHING has been observed in Florida and the details might be revealed in the next few weeks. I'll reserve judgement until I actually see some data. I try to be optimistic, but decades of rumors have set my expectations low. I hope to be pleasantly surprised.
For the one 1000 time, how did a controversial conservation story become a Republican bashing forum?
The Bird Forum fanatics are Liberals or even more far left. You can be a fanatic/ideologue equally on the right or the left. The lefties are true believers in their causes just the same as the righties.
Communist/fascist - what the heck is the difference.
People just in general tend to feel that those who agree with them are rational, and those who disagree are irrational true-believer types. Since the majority of the people involved in ALL sides of this discussion are conservation-minded and probably Democrat- or Green-leaning, everyone is going to characterize the others as using "Republican tactics" and being like "right-wing idealogues."
To address Tom's actual question; no, I think after the hornet's nest that was stirred up by the Arkansas announcements, reputable scientists are likely to be extremely cautious now about their public announcements. I would think that the upcoming presentations (if there really are any) are likely to be cautious and conservative in their conclusions, especially if the evidence presented is anything short of drop-dead-certain-no-doubt-about-it.
I heard from an academic that the word is that there is a paper in MX that is being billed as:
... "a talk comparing knocks of Campephilus woodpeckers that
"is not to be missed". "
such is the LOGOS that the carpinterio is hearing.
also ... The carpinterio is with Soggy Bottom Bill (aka the man of constant sorrow) on this one ... Tom might be wise to try to triangulate on exactly where the "morrison springs" rumor eminated since he is known to have aliens and the like on his blog (more power to him)
Bill, even if you can't afford an ivory bill haircut you can still get a haircut ... right? If not, the carpinterio will underwite for you (via pay pal thru tom) ... you are one shaggy dude ...
Speaking of Shaggy tom, did james gorman ever see the fitzmustache?
man I laugh about that every time I see it ... it is among the most sublime bits of bird humor ever ...
Haircuts are against my religion...
(That user icon was taken on a beach after a 30 mile ride on the back of a Harley, just for extra shagginess)
The only thing that seems clear is that SOMETHING has been observed in Florida
Did they ever find out who owned that SUV in the WalMart parking lot?
P.S. I should add that the shagginess breaks up my silhouette, so I can sneak up on woodpeckers and grab them by their tails.
Post a Comment