Club of Rome: COP29 “No longer fit for purpose”
49 minutes ago
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My Blog List
-
-
The Clock Is Ticking4 hours ago
-
-
-
-
-
Reconstructing the Esper Reconstruction5 months ago
-
Energy output dented by wind drought5 months ago
-
ビタミンと勃起の関係9 months ago
-
What I’ve Been Up To10 months ago
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
11 comments:
d01/35/001 is a Tawny-winged
Woodcreeper. Any other errors
noted?
All I see is a watermark obscuring whatever lies beneath. Can someone from VIREO remove the watermark?
I'm convinced. Where do I send the million dollars.
All I see is a watermark obscuring whatever lies beneath.
No doubt.
Yes how clever, the watermark obscures the image of the bird.
And again we'll have to assume there's a bird there. Then there's the giant picture.. looks like a stuffed bird but it says: September. No year. No "taken in September 1898"... just September.
Ayeeeee... even the believers are
edgy and cynical of this one.
You'll need to register to get the blownup pics, but it won't help too much to blow them up.
Paul in New Paltz NY
I signed up and I'm looking at the blown-up photo.
I see nothing for the watermark to obscure. It's fuzzy. I'm not even sure there's a bird in the photo.
It's a "perfect" IBWO photo.
This is obviously a photo of one
of the "stealth" Ivory-bills. No
doubt the bird is on the backside
of the tree.
This is the photograph referred to
on page 188 of Jackson's book. The
photo supposedly shows a female
Ivory-bill peering from her nesting
cavitiy somewhere in the Big Thicket of E. Texas. The cavity is on the left side of the tree,
below the fork. Neil Wright is said to have found the nest in March '67, however, the date when the photograph was taken is not indicated.
Here's a relevant paragraph from page 188 of Jackson's book:
"A record by Neal Wright, an unemployed woodsman, is intriguing and yet inconclusive. Wright was said to have found a pair at a nest in the Big Thicket (no locality given) in March 1967 and had photographed the female in the nest entrance. Reynard saw the photo and said that it was fuzzy but definitely of a Campephilus woodpecker. The bizarre ending of the story is that the area was "agent-oranged" and cut shortly after the discovery. No further details or reasons for the actions are known."
Finally got to see the enlarged photo, and I am convinced it's another hoax:
To have the foreground out of focus but the background in focus, the photographer would have to be very close to the subject in the foreground (or else, with the camera focused to "infinity," *everything* would be more-or-less in focus!).
Compare the "woodpecker" to the leaves in the same plane. Those leaves, which look like Red Maple leaves to me, are huge compared to the woodpecker. My bet is that this was yet another branch stub woopecker.
Strange story, though.
I'm surprised the Atchafalaya photos aren't in the VIREO results for Ivory-billed Woodpecker. I thought the two 1971 photos were there, too.
My Two Cents
Isn't that nest cavity too close to the ground?
Post a Comment