Ministry Of Truth At Work In Florida
52 minutes ago
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Friday, July 13, 2007
Commentary written after the '05 AOU meeting
The piece below evidently circulated behind the scenes after the infamous AOU meeting in August '05. I've removed only the signature portion.
----
The AOU’s response to the purported rediscovery of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker
The usual clichés in praise of sound skepticism applied. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Amazing! . . . if true. Or, to quote the venerable David Hume, A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. Yet at the AOU’s 2005 meeting in Santa Barbara, sound skepticism evaded our stalwart organization when it officially embraced claims of the rediscovery of Campephilus principalis, the Ivory-billed Woodpecker. We write to take the AOU to task for its foray into faith-based groupthink.
It was not enough to allow a team of qualified ornithologists to present their important claims. Instead, the AOU treaded into the unfamiliar territory of boosterism. We watched in disbelief as the "rediscovery" repeatedly was referred to uncritically, as if there were nothing to discuss. And much fanfare surrounded a plenary session at which "proof of the rediscovery" was presented at length. Apparently to heighten its significance, meetings were recessed for the day and the only item on the calendar was this special public event, at which not a word of caution was heard. In the end it was left to a reporter for The New York Times to ask if evidence presented was definitive or merely suggestive.
We acknowledge that a rebuttal team had planned to share their concerns, but last-minute brinksmanship—referred to in poker terms on National Public Radio's All Things Considered—made the critics fold (to their eventual regret). And so the show went on.
As we exited from the plenary, should we or other skeptics have gone beyond our displeasure and our small discussion groups in the shadows? Probably. But we emphasize the eleventh-hour pullout and cite intimidation in the face of the well-organized media blitz confronting us. Sadly, as a result of this effective blitz, in the meeting’s wake it has become increasingly clear that the media were not being given the whole story and therefore the layperson could not recognize the controversy for what it is: a question of the nature of scientific evidence.
To this end the AOU’s unabashed endorsement widened an already deep gulf between professional (mainly academic) ornithologists and skilled birders. Differences in higher education aside, members of this latter group are precisely those most qualified to assess claims of the Ivory-billed ilk, as this group accounts for most members of national, state, and provincial bird records committees and is most responsible for vetting non-specimen records reported in North American Birds, Western Birds, and regional journals. We know firsthand that within this subset the vast majority never considered the "rediscovery" proven. It would be a rare records committee indeed that would find the Ivory-billed Woodpecker documentation acceptable. Why were these people ignored? Why did North American Birds (59:228–229, 2005) publish an editorial recognizing the uncertainty of the "rediscovery" when the AOU was only sucked along in the wake of the Team Rediscovery machine? Whether or not the existence of one or more Ivory-billed Woodpeckers ultimately is documented beyond the shadow of a doubt (something we all hope for), our point will remain: the AOU publicly proclaimed "Mission Accomplished" in Santa Barbara based on evidence that many AOU members found to be far less than convincing.
In closing, our quarrel is not with those who sounded the alarm of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker’s “rediscovery,” to say nothing of those sending out solicitations or on national lecture tours. Rather, it is with the AOU’s response to that alarm. Hope and faith are admirable sentiments—we would not want to live in a world without them. It is appropriate that there are places of worship throughout the continent that specialize in such matters. But at a time when science is on the run in the United States, institutions like the AOU must stand firm in the face of efforts to weaken scientific methods or to construct facts around predetermined goals. We hope, dare we say, that in the future the AOU will be sensitive to any appearance of cronyism within its ranks and will stand unwaveringly for the very highest scientific standards.
----
Update: Note that a video of Fitz' '05 plenary address is here.
----
The AOU’s response to the purported rediscovery of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker
The usual clichés in praise of sound skepticism applied. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Amazing! . . . if true. Or, to quote the venerable David Hume, A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. Yet at the AOU’s 2005 meeting in Santa Barbara, sound skepticism evaded our stalwart organization when it officially embraced claims of the rediscovery of Campephilus principalis, the Ivory-billed Woodpecker. We write to take the AOU to task for its foray into faith-based groupthink.
It was not enough to allow a team of qualified ornithologists to present their important claims. Instead, the AOU treaded into the unfamiliar territory of boosterism. We watched in disbelief as the "rediscovery" repeatedly was referred to uncritically, as if there were nothing to discuss. And much fanfare surrounded a plenary session at which "proof of the rediscovery" was presented at length. Apparently to heighten its significance, meetings were recessed for the day and the only item on the calendar was this special public event, at which not a word of caution was heard. In the end it was left to a reporter for The New York Times to ask if evidence presented was definitive or merely suggestive.
We acknowledge that a rebuttal team had planned to share their concerns, but last-minute brinksmanship—referred to in poker terms on National Public Radio's All Things Considered—made the critics fold (to their eventual regret). And so the show went on.
As we exited from the plenary, should we or other skeptics have gone beyond our displeasure and our small discussion groups in the shadows? Probably. But we emphasize the eleventh-hour pullout and cite intimidation in the face of the well-organized media blitz confronting us. Sadly, as a result of this effective blitz, in the meeting’s wake it has become increasingly clear that the media were not being given the whole story and therefore the layperson could not recognize the controversy for what it is: a question of the nature of scientific evidence.
To this end the AOU’s unabashed endorsement widened an already deep gulf between professional (mainly academic) ornithologists and skilled birders. Differences in higher education aside, members of this latter group are precisely those most qualified to assess claims of the Ivory-billed ilk, as this group accounts for most members of national, state, and provincial bird records committees and is most responsible for vetting non-specimen records reported in North American Birds, Western Birds, and regional journals. We know firsthand that within this subset the vast majority never considered the "rediscovery" proven. It would be a rare records committee indeed that would find the Ivory-billed Woodpecker documentation acceptable. Why were these people ignored? Why did North American Birds (59:228–229, 2005) publish an editorial recognizing the uncertainty of the "rediscovery" when the AOU was only sucked along in the wake of the Team Rediscovery machine? Whether or not the existence of one or more Ivory-billed Woodpeckers ultimately is documented beyond the shadow of a doubt (something we all hope for), our point will remain: the AOU publicly proclaimed "Mission Accomplished" in Santa Barbara based on evidence that many AOU members found to be far less than convincing.
In closing, our quarrel is not with those who sounded the alarm of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker’s “rediscovery,” to say nothing of those sending out solicitations or on national lecture tours. Rather, it is with the AOU’s response to that alarm. Hope and faith are admirable sentiments—we would not want to live in a world without them. It is appropriate that there are places of worship throughout the continent that specialize in such matters. But at a time when science is on the run in the United States, institutions like the AOU must stand firm in the face of efforts to weaken scientific methods or to construct facts around predetermined goals. We hope, dare we say, that in the future the AOU will be sensitive to any appearance of cronyism within its ranks and will stand unwaveringly for the very highest scientific standards.
----
Update: Note that a video of Fitz' '05 plenary address is here.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
About that mid-1980s "rediscovery" in Cuba
I noticed these sentences in Martjan Lammertink's February 1995 article, "No more hope for the Ivory-billed Woodpecker":
I did a little searching and found this very interesting piece by Cuban herpetologist Alberto Estrada. The piece identifies Giraldo Alayon (above), as an arachnologist, and Pasada (above) as Alayon's wife.
If you're a believer in the mid-1980s Cuban Ivory-bill "rediscovery", Estrada's piece should give you a sinking feeling. It's got all the earmarks of your typical Arkansas/Choctawhatchee-style IBWO hysteria--a flurry of very low-quality sightings at the beginning, lots of excitement over things like bark peeling and toots, subsequent years of fruitless searching without a single photo, etc.
Yes, I know that Pileated Woodpecker wasn't a confusion species in Cuba, but note what Tim Gallagher wrote starting on page 163 of The Grail Bird:
One year later, in the afternoon of 16 March 1987, an observation was made that would appear to be the very last positive record of the species. Giraldo Alayón and Aimé Pasada saw a female woodpecker flying at a distance of about 200 m.A female flyby at 200 meters?!
I did a little searching and found this very interesting piece by Cuban herpetologist Alberto Estrada. The piece identifies Giraldo Alayon (above), as an arachnologist, and Pasada (above) as Alayon's wife.
If you're a believer in the mid-1980s Cuban Ivory-bill "rediscovery", Estrada's piece should give you a sinking feeling. It's got all the earmarks of your typical Arkansas/Choctawhatchee-style IBWO hysteria--a flurry of very low-quality sightings at the beginning, lots of excitement over things like bark peeling and toots, subsequent years of fruitless searching without a single photo, etc.
Yes, I know that Pileated Woodpecker wasn't a confusion species in Cuba, but note what Tim Gallagher wrote starting on page 163 of The Grail Bird:
The rediscovery of the ivory-bill there [Cuba] had generated intense scientific interest and media coverage, but all of the sightings consisted of brief glimpses totaling about a minute or two, and the researchers were never able to get even one photograph or sound recording of the birds. Subsequent searches in Cuba were relatively fruitless--researchers had perhaps a couple of tantalizing glimpses here and there, but nothing substantial. Some ornithologists now even openly doubt that Short and the others had really seen ivory-bills. They say things like "If you want to see an ivory-bill bad enough, a crow flying past with sunlight flashing on its wings can look pretty good."
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Bobby Harrison's site revamped
Here.
Update: Note that on Bobby's calendar here, another "Foundation Gala" is scheduled for February 23-24, 2008.
Note also that Harrison (and Jerome Jackson) are scheduled to appear at Ding Darling Days on October 10, 2007:
Update: Note that on Bobby's calendar here, another "Foundation Gala" is scheduled for February 23-24, 2008.
Note also that Harrison (and Jerome Jackson) are scheduled to appear at Ding Darling Days on October 10, 2007:
7:30pm
Ivory-billed Woodpecker Program at BIG ARTS
With noted researchers Bobby Harrison and Dr. Jerry Jackson
Tickets for two presentations: $15 for adults, $5 for students
Changes at ivorybill.org
USFWS press release
From the USFWS here:
...The Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge is located in the upper basin of the Tensas River in northeast Louisiana. The area is the last documented home of the ivory-billed woodpecker, federally listed as endangered...Aren't we supposed to believe that the IBWO was documented in Arkansas a few years ago?
Monday, July 09, 2007
"YEEHAW!"
Just to review:
1. Check out Bill Pulliam's assessment of a Fishcrow video in the "calm light of morning" here.
An excerpt:
An excerpt:
1. Check out Bill Pulliam's assessment of a Fishcrow video in the "calm light of morning" here.
An excerpt:
...Light-colored secondaries. White trailing edge. I keep looking at the geometry and the particulars, and I still cannot turn it into an artifact or an illusion caused by fortuitous juxtaposition of different parts of the bird or any stationary objects. All together now... YEEHAW!2. Bill describes his reaction to the Luneau video here. An excerpt:
...
Ya done nabbed that sucker, Mike.
...And this is why I am convinced by the Bayou de View sightings and video. When I finally got that video to download and play on my computer I practically jumped up and started dancing and hollering "YEE HAW!!! No $@$%#@ way that bird is a %#%^$ Pileated!!!!!" It's all in the jizz, and that jizz is NO Pileated, not even remotely. If that is a pileated then my chickens are tinamous. You can holler yourself horse about upperwings and underwings and leading edges and trailing edges and halo effects if you like, bury your head looking for the Field Marks (tm), meanwhile missing the sledgehammer of jizz trying to get your attention by pounding on your head with sirens wailing and big flashing neon letters declaring "IVORYBILL IVORYBILL IVORIBILL!!!!!!!"3. Bill provides his first impressions of the Choctawhatchee "evidence" here.
An excerpt:
Y'all are tripping if you think those are ordinary sounds made by common swamp denizens, especially considering that they got a rap or a kent about every 30-40 hours on average. You can spend a HELL of a lot longer than 40 hours in the company of all the ordinary critters (and tree squeeks, etc.) of the swamps and never hear anything like that. I've spent thousands of hours in their good company and never heard those kenty noises.
Y'all are tripping if you think Tyler Hicks' sighting is just a Pileated and a lot of wishful thinking. Upperwing and underwing patterns, black crest, dorsal stripes...
Another post by Collinson
Here.
An excerpt:
An excerpt:
And remember, it's very tempting to pontificate that we are only arguing about the Luneau video still bacause Ivorybills are extinct. If they were still around, we'd be looking at photos of the 2007 nests in National Geographic by now.
Sunday, July 08, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
