Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My Blog List
-
-
-
France And England To Defeat Russia13 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
5 comments:
“Maybe it will go some way to explaining the psychology of birding, and how expectation and excitement can potentially bias the records of experienced and competent observers.”
The psychology behind these types of books is quite clear. They are written with only greed and self-promotion in mind. Such works tell us little about “competent observers” but everything about people that are willing to exploit situations for their own gain, at any cost. They relate more to the psychology of TV evangelists than competent scientists (IMHO).
"They are written with only greed and self-promotion in mind."
Believe me, I am a hardened skeptic, but that is going too far. I'm confident that Hill truly believed they had found Ivory-bills. If so, it was a story worth telling and a story people would want to hear.
Someday someone will write a book about the whole fiasco, and I can assure you that the True Believers will accuse them of writing it "with greed and self-promotion." Most books are written by people hoping to make a profit (greed) and who would enjoy seeing their name on the cover (self-promotion.)
Before people try to out-skeptic me, please realize I'm only speaking to the motivation of Hill and not the accuracy of his claims.
"Believe me, I am a hardened skeptic, but that is going too far. I'm confident that Hill truly believed they had found Ivory-bills."
I agree. Hill's book is an example of profound and sustained self-delusion and remarkably bad judgement, not of naked greed and cynical self-promotion.
“Believe me, I am a hardened skeptic, but that is going too far. I'm confident that Hill truly believed they had found Ivory-bills.”
With all due respect to your and Ibwo Atheist’s more positive opinion of this situation, I suspect that the evidence might argue for the alternative. How strong someone “believed” something is not fully the issue. I would guess that even the most wayward TV evangelists truly believed initially that a deity spoke to them. It is what a person does after the belief event that tells us about character and intent. This is especially true in when we are talking about “competent scientists”. In my opinion, the weight of the combined evidence previously discussed on this blog and elsewhere about several of the IBWO researchers leads me to see more con-artists than competent scientists.
"about several of the IBWO researchers"
Let's not tar them all with the same brush
Post a Comment