The rediscovery (if that's what it was) of the ivory-billed woodpecker in an Arkansas swamp made international headlines in 2005.From Plenty magazine:
Ornithologists are also using this method to try to confirm the existence of the ivory-billed woodpecker (a.k.a. the Lord God bird), which many scientists still believe to be extinct.-------
It's truly amazing that not long ago, so many people were fooled by the flimsiest of sound evidence.
Remember the "indisputable" editorial from the New York Times?
Also note this paragraph from a Dec '05 Birdforum post:
Jim Fitzpatrick plays the call notes of a known Ivory-billed from the Singer tract about 2-3 times and then he plays the call notes that were recorded by the Cornell Team. It matches it to a T! All of us experienced birders were sitting there looking at each other and could not believe what we were hearing. We whispered "those call notes nailed the ID as a IBWO call notes". All of us heard Blue Jays mimic other bird calls, we all know the White-breasted Nutatch call notes and we all gave a thumbs up as a Ivory-billed. What was funny is during lunch two birders who are very well known outside of Minnesota and tells us that tape recording is the reason why birders like David Sibley and others are keeping quiet and NOT butting heads anymore with the Cornell group. Hearing the tapes on a computer is a lot different than hearing the tapes in a auditorium. I cannot explain but it sounds better in a auditorium. Even the double knocks sound very convincing.
Posts
3 comments:
From that BirdForum post... I am very skeptical what Jim saw and if it wasn't for Driscoll's sighting I would of not believed Jim at all because those binoculars are no good. I like Bobby Harrison notes and I like Sparling's notes. The clincher is the tape recordings.
So Driscoll's brief sighting is key and the tape recordings (not even considered to be solid by CLO) is "the clincher". That's what you get when you have inexperienced and/or incautious people running around making proclamations.
That's what you get when you have inexperienced and/or incautious people running around making proclamations.
It's also the power of suggestion, and telling people what they want to hear.
Many people have commented that they weren't convinced by "the video" or audio on their computers, but were when one of the Big Names in the search showed them the same evidence in an auditorium in the presence of large numbers of True Believers.
Don't these people (who are "convinced" when hearing someone talk about the "rediscovery" in a confident, authoritative manner) know anything about advertising, manipulation of the masses, etc.
If they were told to believe in the "rediscovery", buy a large-screen TV and drive a certain type of car they would probably do all three and think anyone who does not is inferior or an infidel. Human history is the tale of the manipulation of masses and it is sad to see academics, who should be asking their audience to examine things critically, simply trying to cover up their own lack of discipline by engaging an equally undisciplined public.
Post a Comment