Are they Ivorybills? I’ve got a couple of more candidates I’d like to examine before I pass final judgment, but so far they look pretty good to me.
Fortunately for us, there is also a snippet of that video in which the bird is visible. Conclusive? Hardly, but it’s another video of an alleged Ivory-billed Woodpecker that looks pretty good to me.
It looks "pretty good"? Gosh, wonder what it would take for a picture to look "pretty bad" to the O'Connells?
The O'Connells and folks like them are part of the problem but they have designed their alternate reality in such a way that it is nearly impossible to set them straight without offending their tender sensibilities.
Here's what O'Connell's blog says on their "about us" page: We like nature, music, birds, learning, playing, dancing, Irish stuff, ImaginaryLand, Jedi knights, Cornell, Penn State, bacon, real maple syrup, old movies, Britcoms, bread, butter, spicy chips, warm hot cocoas, people being nice to each other just because, and, of course, cookies.
What fine, noble thoughts! Yes, we are very impressed by their kindness and civility.
Their intellectual curiosity: not so much. Their ability to judge character and evaluate scientific claims objectively? Not at all.
when Geoff Hill made his presentation on new Ivorybill evidence from their Florida field site, there was a mass exodus from the other rooms where concurrent sessions were being held. I think about 400 people were crammed into a lecture hall with capacity for 250, and you could’ve heard a pin drop as Geoff began speaking.
That must have been a nice feeling for Geoff. He and Brian must have felt important at that moment.
Those are the sorts of moments that many human beings strive for. Geoff and Brian will surely want to relive that exciting moment. They only need to spend some time figuring out a way to continue to make such events happen for them.
I don't know what kind of nasty pills y'all have been taking lately, but my "alternate reality" includes a brand of skepticism that leaves room for grace. Why on earth do you think it appropriate to attack my family's personal statement merely because I attended a talk in which I rated the quality of Ivorybill evidence presented "pretty good"? You've just provided your readers with some excellent fodder with which to judge your character, and you have my pity.
Why on earth do you think it appropriate to attack my family's personal statement merely because I attended a talk in which I rated the quality of Ivorybill evidence presented "pretty good"?
Please, troll, try a little harder. Mr. O'Connell, a blogger himself, would surely not post as "anonymous."
…. there was a mass exodus from the other rooms where concurrent sessions were being held. I think about 400 people were crammed into a lecture hall with capacity for 250, and you could’ve heard a pin drop as Geoff began speaking.
Years ago during an alcohol fueled discussion with a physicist friend (a lifelong birder) about why biology is widely considered a “soft science”, he quipped that ”ornithology is the Gello of biology”. Given the apparent “mass” interest in pseudoscience at the recent AOU, he sadly may have been correct.
You are so wrong! Look fellows, if it wasn't for us this whole fiasco would have whimpered itself into extinction by now.
But because of us they are digging into this foolishness even more and more. They have their feet in concrete and they won't give up until they discover that they have hit the bottom of the Mariana's trench.
10 comments:
Are they Ivorybills? I’ve got a couple of more candidates I’d like to examine before I pass final judgment, but so far they look pretty good to me.
Fortunately for us, there is also a snippet of that video in which the bird is visible. Conclusive? Hardly, but it’s another video of an alleged Ivory-billed Woodpecker that looks pretty good to me.
It looks "pretty good"? Gosh, wonder what it would take for a picture to look "pretty bad" to the O'Connells?
The O'Connells and folks like them are part of the problem but they have designed their alternate reality in such a way that it is nearly impossible to set them straight without offending their tender sensibilities.
Here's what O'Connell's blog says on their "about us" page: We like nature, music, birds, learning, playing, dancing, Irish stuff, ImaginaryLand, Jedi knights, Cornell, Penn State, bacon, real maple syrup, old movies, Britcoms, bread, butter, spicy chips, warm hot cocoas, people being nice to each other just because, and, of course, cookies.
What fine, noble thoughts! Yes, we are very impressed by their kindness and civility.
Their intellectual curiosity: not so much. Their ability to judge character and evaluate scientific claims objectively? Not at all.
when Geoff Hill made his presentation on new Ivorybill evidence from their Florida field site, there was a mass exodus from the other rooms where concurrent sessions were being held. I think about 400 people were crammed into a lecture hall with capacity for 250, and you could’ve heard a pin drop as Geoff began speaking.
That must have been a nice feeling for Geoff. He and Brian must have felt important at that moment.
Those are the sorts of moments that many human beings strive for. Geoff and Brian will surely want to relive that exciting moment. They only need to spend some time figuring out a way to continue to make such events happen for them.
I think they will manage to do so.
I don't know what kind of nasty pills y'all have been taking lately, but my "alternate reality" includes a brand of skepticism that leaves room for grace. Why on earth do you think it appropriate to attack my family's personal statement merely because I attended a talk in which I rated the quality of Ivorybill evidence presented "pretty good"? You've just provided your readers with some excellent fodder with which to judge your character, and you have my pity.
Why on earth do you think it appropriate to attack my family's personal statement merely because I attended a talk in which I rated the quality of Ivorybill evidence presented "pretty good"?
Please, troll, try a little harder. Mr. O'Connell, a blogger himself, would surely not post as "anonymous."
I guess after a few Cabernets and locally-brewed beers everything starts to look pretty good to you.
…. there was a mass exodus from the other rooms where concurrent sessions were being held. I think about 400 people were crammed into a lecture hall with capacity for 250, and you could’ve heard a pin drop as Geoff began speaking.
Years ago during an alcohol fueled discussion with a physicist friend (a lifelong birder) about why biology is widely considered a “soft science”, he quipped that ”ornithology is the Gello of biology”. Given the apparent “mass” interest in pseudoscience at the recent AOU, he sadly may have been correct.
So much for the boycott.
So much for the boycott.
LOL.
Not even a heckler.
Sad.
So much for the boycott.
No, no, you missed the point of our boycott comments. We wanted a contrary reaction by the ornithology community. They did exactly what we wanted.
They went for the bait. Now we have 400 eyewitnesses to Hillcrow's unstoppable stupidity.
The higher the pedestal...the farther the fall. And the coming fall is going to be breathtaking.
So much for the boycott.
You are so wrong! Look fellows, if it wasn't for us this whole fiasco would have whimpered itself into extinction by now.
But because of us they are digging into this foolishness even more and more. They have their feet in concrete and they won't give up until they discover that they have hit the bottom of the Mariana's trench.
Hey....how about that for a metaphor?
Post a Comment