Monday, September 10, 2007

"Just too tantalizing to ignore"

IBWO article here.


Anonymous said...

Tom, you often relish articles that are poorly written or wrong as long as they support your opinions.

The article is obvious filler, copied from one or more sources in about ten mintues...and poorly done. You can't resist posting it because of the misleading pix caption that uses the word tame when we all know that the hatchling was taken from its nest and placed there. It doesn't looks too comfortable perched there does it?

The great majority of historical authors do not describe the species as tame. But again you have showed your penchant for embracing the misleading... mainly for your sychophants. Others, besides those 20, saw through you years ago.


Anonymous said...

It may not look comfortable, but, unlike the "birds" in the Luneau and Hill videos, it does look like an IBWO!

And, fortunately for us sychophants, Tom saw through the IBWO hoax years ago.....

Anonymous said...

The great majority of historical authors do not describe the species as tame.


400 +- pristine specimens in existence, plus probably hundreds more lost, all taken with a small gauge shotgun with small shot. You don't do this at 500 yards through a 10x scope. Ya gotta be on top of the bird.

If the birds had actually been supernatural phantoms as described by CLO, they might be extant today.
Problem is, they were woodpeckers. And woodpeckers, like other birds, become very tolerant of human activity, and are therefore easily studied, shot, or photographed.

The believers will begin to argue that the old collectors found nests and collected birds. That is correct. And, of course, that is not possible today.