One excerpt:
And, this man from southern Louisiana did not want to come forward. He wanted to remain anonymous. He didn’t want to be bothered by people. But he had these pictures, and Lowry believed him. This was a big controversy, and for years people have talked about these mystery pictures. And I did a lot of detective work and tracked down the man, and I interviewed him. He was a fascinating character and totally believable. I mean he was out with his hunting dog, and he had been seeing these birds. First he told the high school biology teacher, who told him to tell George Lowry. George even came out a few times, and saw where the the birds had been building roost holes in the trees. It looked like they were going to nest, possibly. And, so, once again, this had a chilling effect. Everyone thought it was a hoax. But, I totally believed that man. I went out to the area, and it looked good.
Then there was Mary Scott, a birder from California. She now lives in Arizona. She had a sighting in Arkansas, just 11 months earlier than Gene Sparling’s sighting in January of 2004. Her description was perfect, by the way, because she was actually an ivory-bill searcher. And she told me about it. And this area, in the White River Refuge, was excellent. I found the kinds of tree scalings that are typical of the Ivory-bill, and I was really excited.
So, when I went home, and I heard about Gene Sparling’s sighting a couple of weeks later, I was already so interested in the area. And this was less than 50 miles from where she’d seen her bird. That really made a big difference. So we went down there and saw the bird.
Another reason we found this, I secretly suspect, is that these birds are on the increase...
Posts
9 comments:
200+ birders with long lingering scope views can blow a Skylark ID in California, but disparate people who are primed for an IBWO, and in some cases obsessed with it, can't make a series of observation errors on sightings that are all of a few seconds?
To the guy who wants to know the probability that all of these sightings are wrong, I'd say pretty high.
As Prum said "All of the people who have seen it fleetingly are true believers and magical things happen to true believers."
Like seeing Divine Beings in tortillas and tree bark for example.
So, when I went home, and I heard about Gene Sparling’s sighting a couple of weeks later, I was already so interested in the area. And this was less than 50 miles from where she’d seen her bird. That really made a big difference. So we went down there and saw the bird.
Very simple, very easy, as Chef Tell used to say.
"secretly suspect"
He gives new meaning to the phrase on so many levels!
Only someone who is set on poor analogies would compare what happened in California when the unknown plummage of I believe an immature HY, winter longspur, in the early hey day of birding, occured ONE TIME........... with multiple views, a few crippling and robust, with species that are easily recognizable for hundreds of years with minimal skins needing to come into play as the was needed in the Cal incident.
The one thing you might have but don't is yes the majority of IBWO reports are short....... except for the minutes long look Kulivan had of a pair.
Do you have any decency for good science before you press send.
Please ban the anon category....some of these comments would certainly be eliminated if the childish sniper knew his idiocy was less hidden.
"Only someone who is set on poor analogies would compare what happened in California when the unknown plummage of I believe an immature HY, winter longspur, in the early hey day of birding, occured ONE TIME........... with multiple views, a few crippling and robust,"
It is a good analogy. In the notorious Eurasian Skylark [not longspur as mistakenly implied by the TB, who is clearly unfamiliar with the incident; it was initially misidentified as a Smith's Longspur] incident the bird was misidentified to FAMILY! Likewise, many IBWO sightings cannot reliably be attributed to Picidae and may involve Anhingas, Wood Ducks, etc. Had the CA case involved merely confusion between two longspur species it would have been excusable.
The true story of the CA skylark incident is here:
http://montereybay.com/creagrus/CAchronoSkylark.html
"with species that are easily recognizable for hundreds of years with minimal skins needing to come into play as the was needed in the Cal incident."
Still a good analogy, as even those who have studied skins of IBWO and PIWO still manage somehow to misidentify them after spending countless hours scrutinizing deinterlaced videos, blurry Fishcrow stills, improbable field sketches, etc. You are correct that IBWO and Pileated SHOULD be easily recognized by all compentent birders and certainly by "expert" birders like Tyler Hicks, which is why skeptics like me are so amazed by the ridiculous reports of TBs.
"Do you have any decency for good science before you press send."
Do you have any decency for [sic] good English before you press send?
"Please ban the anon category....some of these comments would certainly be eliminated if the childish sniper knew his idiocy was less hidden"
hmmmmm...... it seems you posted as an anon yourself. I'll refer to your post and previous similar posts to exemplify the hypocrisy of TBs.
Please ban the anon category....some of these comments would certainly be eliminated if the childish sniper knew his idiocy was less hidden.
"In the future, every one will be allowed to be anonymous for 15 minutes", George W. Bush - signing statement attached to Patriot Act.
with multiple views, a few crippling and robust,
Other than Kulivan, who reported an observation of more than a few seconds? "Crippling" and "robust" are absurd adjectives for any other sighting. Many (most?) barely rise above "momentary".
Do you have any decency for good science before you press send.
Per CLO's web site, Kulivan "watched them for 10 minutes and knew they were nothing he had ever seen before." He didn't even know what he was looking at, but you seem to think that believing his sighting is "good science". His sighting is intriguing. It is not proof. And nobody has been able to follow up that sighting with proof.
You, like all the TBs (on this point I will lump you all together), also seem to have no understanding of geography. IF Kulivan's sighting was indeed of IBWO, what bearing does that have on the "evidence" from Florida or Arkansas? The answer in terms of "good science" is NONE. Rediscovery of a species in one location does not make the data from a completely different location any better or worse. So don't cherry-pick datum from totally different data sets and then call them one related set.
Learn what "good science" means before spouting off next time.
"So don't cherry-pick datum from totally different data sets and then call them one related set."
I think the main point was that if the birds exist in one part of its former range, they are likely to occur in other parts...regardless of your concept of "geography."
Post a Comment