If you really want to form an opinion on the debate yourself, then I suggest you visit all four sites and read and absorb the pertinent scientific literature, as well as Tanner’s and Jackson’s books. Then you’ll be informed.
We're way ahead of you, bro'.
For those who might care to learn my professional opinion (why, I don’t know) of the evidence as an ornithologist and veteran birder, I consider it inconclusive.
So, the failure of anyone to provide credible proof of a living IBWO after 60+ years of searching for it following its inevitable disappearance in the 1940s is "inconclusive"? Exactly how many years do we have to wait? Or is every report of every animal's extinction "inconclusive"?
Meanwhile, the Luneau video and this worthless photo shown to you by Brian Rolek are deemed to be "pretty good" evidence?
Sorry, friend: does not compute.
not obviously not Ivory-billed Woodpeckers
That's true of every blurry photo of an unidentifiable black and white bird. This is crazy talk.
The double-knocks are, to me, the strongest evidence for Ivorybill persistence, based primarily on the fact that I’ve never heard such sounds in about 30 years of birding eastern forests.
Hearing a sound that you've never heard is evidence that IBWOs are not extinct? I understand that you're not a scientist, but these "explanations" for your "professional opinion" are simply nonsensical.
I’m encouraged by some of the evidence coming from Florida and Arkansas, but like everyone else, witholding final judgment
I'm not withholding final judgment. The bird is extinct. It will never be photographed. Fitzcrow and Geoff Hill are unprofessional hacks for shovelling this stuff at gullible folks like you.
Take it to the bank. My predictions about the failure of Cornell and others to back up their extraordinary claims were proven correct. That's reason number one to take me seriously.
Posts
2 comments:
If you really want to form an opinion on the debate yourself, then I suggest you visit all four sites and read and absorb the pertinent scientific literature, as well as Tanner’s and Jackson’s books. Then you’ll be informed.
We're way ahead of you, bro'.
For those who might care to learn my professional opinion (why, I don’t know) of the evidence as an ornithologist and veteran birder, I consider it inconclusive.
So, the failure of anyone to provide credible proof of a living IBWO after 60+ years of searching for it following its inevitable disappearance in the 1940s is "inconclusive"? Exactly how many years do we have to wait? Or is every report of every animal's extinction "inconclusive"?
Meanwhile, the Luneau video and this worthless photo shown to you by Brian Rolek are deemed to be "pretty good" evidence?
Sorry, friend: does not compute.
not obviously not Ivory-billed Woodpeckers
That's true of every blurry photo of an unidentifiable black and white bird. This is crazy talk.
The double-knocks are, to me, the strongest evidence for Ivorybill persistence, based primarily on the fact that I’ve never heard such sounds in about 30 years of birding eastern forests.
Hearing a sound that you've never heard is evidence that IBWOs are not extinct? I understand that you're not a scientist, but these "explanations" for your "professional opinion" are simply nonsensical.
I’m encouraged by some of the evidence coming from Florida and Arkansas, but like everyone else, witholding final judgment
I'm not withholding final judgment. The bird is extinct. It will never be photographed. Fitzcrow and Geoff Hill are unprofessional hacks for shovelling this stuff at gullible folks like you.
Take it to the bank. My predictions about the failure of Cornell and others to back up their extraordinary claims were proven correct. That's reason number one to take me seriously.
From my perch atop the hill, the world is not obviously not flat.
QED.
Post a Comment