Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (6 Viewers)

chris murphy · Jul 30, 2006

It's gone very quiet in here again....what's up, nobody got anything left to say on the subject?

timeshadowed · Jul 30, 2006

chris murphy said:
It's gone very quiet in here again....what's up, nobody got anything left to say on the subject?

Cyberthrush, writing in his blog, reports that 'Rumors of Ivory-bill reports continue to dribble in from multiple areas even through the hot, steamy summer months'

http://ivorybills.blogspot.com/

MacGillivray's Trout · Jul 30, 2006

cinclodes said:
Over the past few months, I've had some discussions about my data with well known birders and ornithologists. It's always the same pattern. At first, they try to play the devil's advocate. After presenting them with facts that show that their arguments are flawed, I never hear from them again. I still haven't encountered a skeptic who seems to be solely interested in getting at the truth. A friend suggested that I keep throwing facts at them. He was right. They always run away when evidence of the opposite of what they want to believe is placed in front of them. It would be refreshing to encounter a skeptic with sufficient intellectual honesty to acknowledge that they were wrong about a certain point or that I was right about a certain point.

Please note I've challenged your evidence on here twice and have not received a reply.

Bonsaibirder · Jul 30, 2006

MacGillivray's Trout said:
Please note I've challenged your evidence on here twice and have not received a reply.

I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who finds it ironic that Cinclodes does not respond to any criticism/questioning of his evidence or methods but instead posts messages moaning about mythical birders who stop responding to him when he challenges their opinions. :h?:

chris murphy · Jul 30, 2006

timeshadowed said:
Cyberthrush, writing in his blog, reports that 'Rumors of Ivory-bill reports continue to dribble in from multiple areas even through the hot, steamy summer months'

http://ivorybills.blogspot.com/

Yes, I've read his blog, I was entertained by some of the comedy on there, particularly the narrow-minded, mis-guided views on sceptics.

fishcrow · Jul 30, 2006

chris murphy said:
Yes, I've read his blog, I was entertained by some of the comedy on there, particularly the narrow-minded, mis-guided views on sceptics.

I, too, have very specific views on skeptics. Considering all the physical evidence that has been obtained and all the ornithologists, biologists, scientists, birders, hunters, fishermen, wildlife officials, etc. who claim to have seen and/or heard Ivory-billed Woodpeckers, it's hard to imagine how one could remain a skeptic (especially a loud-mouthed skeptic). I almost feel sorry for the skeptics. They have no idea what's coming down the pike to crush their flat little world.

Mike Johnston · Jul 30, 2006

cinclodes said:
I, too, have very specific views on skeptics. Considering all the physical evidence that has been obtained and all the ornithologists, biologists, scientists, birders, hunters, fishermen, wildlife officials, etc. who claim to have seen and/or heard Ivory-billed Woodpeckers, it's hard to imagine how one could remain a skeptic (especially a loud-mouthed skeptic). I almost feel sorry for the skeptics. They have no idea what's coming down the pike to crush their flat little world.

I'm afraid it's arrogant and condescending attitudes like this which harm your case. There are equal numbers of 'loud-mouthed' believers who claim much based on very little. And could you please outline exactly what physical evidence you are referring to, and name the biologists, scientists and ornithologists who have claimed to have seen IBWO?

EMalatesta · Jul 31, 2006

cinclodes said:
They have no idea what's coming down the pike to crush their flat little world.

If this means we're finally going to get a mountain of identifiable evidence that will put this issue to rest once and for all, I can hardly wait. I think I can speak for everyone on that.

choupique1 · Jul 31, 2006

cyberthrush said:
hi J., I'll take the bait on that: I s'pose if I had next week off I would definitely head to Florida... for some REST AND RELAXATION... but going into swamps to look for IBWO this time of year, are you NUTS!!; seriously, I can't imagine it in this steamy, stifling heat, mosquito-infested time-of-year.

Having said that, I've little doubt that the birds will eventually be documented in La., Miss., and Fla.; enough folks will be searching there, and there's almost too many good locales to choose from. Texas, S.C., and of course AR. will be pawed over aplenty as well and if the birds are there will likely be found (again) in time. No, if I only had one week to spare I'd be more interested in going to one of the less-covered/publicized river bottom areas of southern Georgia or Alabama, or western Tennessee where not as many man-hours have been expended. Why go where everyone else has or will be spending time... One might start by reviewing Bill Pulliam's take on these 3 states at: http://bbill.blogspot.com/2006/03/georgia.html

but that's just a starting point, and yet it alone offers an overchoice of possibilities for a single week. But only if you're NUTS enough to be out in this swelter!

actually guys.. mid-day... the skeeters aren't so bad this time of year...... of course.. nothing else is moving either.......but..... time will tell now won't it

chris murphy · Jul 31, 2006

cinclodes said:
I, too, have very specific views on skeptics. Considering all the physical evidence that has been obtained and all the ornithologists, biologists, scientists, birders, hunters, fishermen, wildlife officials, etc. who claim to have seen and/or heard Ivory-billed Woodpeckers, it's hard to imagine how one could remain a skeptic (especially a loud-mouthed skeptic). I almost feel sorry for the skeptics. They have no idea what's coming down the pike to crush their flat little world.

Very interesting, you mention all the 'physical evidence' from hunters and fishermen, where is this wealth of evidence? Or are they just 'claims'? The same unsubstantiated claims that continue to be made regarding this species. As for how one could still remain sceptical, well, I think the fact that there has been no substantial evidence for one thing. Almost all the 'evidence' that was put forth by CLO has been dismissed (depending on your point of view), and so far, nobody has got any other conclusive proof that the birds still exist, and so as every day goes by, the case for the birds continued existence weakens.

Speaking of which, you have not responded to messages left on this thread which challenge your own claims.

And lastly, I'd like to address your point that 'They have no idea what's coming down the pike to crush their flat little world'...this (to me) gives the impression that you believe that anyone sceptical is revelling in the lack of confirming info/data. Well, speaking for myself, nothing could be futher from the truth, I would be delighted if it could be proven beyond doubt that the species is extant, and if you are the one to do it, believe me, I will hold my hands up and congratulate you. Until then I grow increasingly infuriated with the way certain organisations have handled themselves, and the continued claims of birds in ludicrous locations (lamp posts in Florida for example), whilst anyone who has a (quite reasonable) sceptical viewpoint is painted as the anti-christ.
Chris

fishcrow · Jul 31, 2006

chris murphy said:
Speaking of which, you have not responded to messages left on this thread which challenge your own claims.

I only respond to serious questions. If you are aware of any that I have missed, please let me know. There are certain participants in this discussion that nobody takes seriously. They have earned their way onto the ignore lists of those who are serious about the ivorybill. If they have an occasional serious comment that gets ignored, it's their own fault. By the way, I didn't say anything about physical evidence from hunters and fishermen.

timeshadowed · Jul 31, 2006

chris murphy said:
Very interesting, you mention all the 'physical evidence' from hunters and fishermen, where is this wealth of evidence? Or are they just 'claims'? The same unsubstantiated claims that continue to be made regarding this species.Chris

In a court of law, 'first-hand eyewitnesses' testimony are considered as evidence, as well as 'suspect ID from a photo line-up by such an eyewitness. So why do you discount all of the eyewitness accounts of the IBWO as not being 'evidence', especially when such an account is very discriptive of an IBWO and not a PIWO?

Also would you be so kind as to give us your definition of the word 'evidence' as it applies to the IBWO?

Bonsaibirder · Jul 31, 2006

cinclodes said:
I only respond to serious questions. If you are aware of any that I have missed, please let me know.

How about post #5559?
How about answering the criticism that your woodpecker is backlit therefore its neck looks thinner than it actually is?
How about giving a "serious" reason why you refuse to take field-notes?
How about admitting that you have only seen one feature of IBWO on your birds?
How about adressing the criticism that you haven't really ever managed to get a decent look at any of these birds?

Actually I suspect that you put anyone who disputes your evidence on your ignore list, including me, therefore making sure you can only communicate with people who agree with you.

Preaching to the converted.

I hope you don't perform your science in a similar way.

MacGillivray's Trout · Jul 31, 2006

cinclodes said:
I only respond to serious questions.

Why no error bars on your flap rate comparison? How do you justify comparing <2 flaps on your bird jumping to another tree with a Pileated in level flight? Where in the literature is flap rate an accepted method for distinguishing IBWO and PIWO? How do you explain the similar light/dark pattern seen on all the trees in your video, which is so similar to the pattern seen on the bird wing? Where are the pictures that clearly show the underwing pattern you promised us?

Mike Johnston · Jul 31, 2006

Mike Johnston said:
And could you please outline exactly what physical evidence you are referring to, and name the biologists, scientists and ornithologists who have claimed to have seen IBWO?

This was a serious question which you have chosen not to answer.

Bonsaibirder · Jul 31, 2006

Mike Johnston said:
This was a serious question which you have chosen not to answer.

"you have chosen to question cinclodes ergo you can not be serious"
John Mackinroe pers. comm.

Mike Johnston · Jul 31, 2006

timeshadowed said:
In a court of law, 'first-hand eyewitnesses' testimony are considered as evidence, as well as 'suspect ID from a photo line-up by such an eyewitness. So why do you discount all of the eyewitness accounts of the IBWO as not being 'evidence', especially when such an account is very discriptive of an IBWO and not a PIWO?

Also would you be so kind as to give us your definition of the word 'evidence' as it applies to the IBWO?

Cinclodes referred to physical evidence, not eye-witness testimony.

As regards evidence for IBWO, it's the same as any other presumed extinct species. This would include things like an actual living or dead specimen; video or still images which the scientific community at large regard as conclusively showing the species; audio recordings which do not match existing species or other natural sounds; physical evidence such as feathers, bones, egg fragments, etc. which can be dated; detailed field notes, including the exact location of discovery, by an experienced field worker. Non-scientific eyewitness accounts, particularly of locals, while important can never be sufficient on their own to claim the existence of a species. They can, however, build up a case for further scientific investigation. This has been the case with a number of rediscoveries. Local accounts of the survival of a species has prompted a scientific expedition which has indeed recovered conclusive evidence for its survival.

Ivory Bill · Jul 31, 2006

How many on this forum reading this hold out optimism that the visual sightings
made in 2004-05 by numerous individuals at different locations at differnt times
are not just all coincidence ?
I for one have to believe that these people must have known what they were seeing
and that Gene Sparling was not hallucinating when all by his lonesome on a clear calm
day in the bayou described the bird dropping into the channel from above the treetops and alomost directly towards the man ...
Just my opinion thats all ...
I haven't post much for a while but see recent posts and just wanted to toss in my
2 cents
Ivory Bill

Curtis Croulet · Jul 31, 2006

Ivory Bill said:
How many on this forum reading this hold out optimism that the visual sightings
made in 2004-05 by numerous individuals at different locations at differnt times
are not just all coincidence ?

I have a high degree of confidence in the 2004-2005 sightings in Arkansas. I even think the Luneau video shows an IBWO. However my patience is wearing a bit thin with these suggestions that a lot of people are seeing Ivory-bills, but they are afraid to come forward for fear of being crushed into the pavement by whithering, career-destroying skepticism. Surely, if people are seeing the birds, then someone is brave enough or foolhardy enough to say, "F*** it, I'm going public with this!"

Ivory Bill · Jul 31, 2006

Curtis Croulet said:
I have a high degree of confidence in the 2004-2005 sightings in Arkansas. I even think the Luneau video shows an IBWO. However my patience is wearing a bit thin with these suggestions that a lot of people are seeing Ivory-bills, but they are afraid to come forward for fear of being crushed into the pavement by whithering, career-destroying skepticism. Surely, if people are seeing the birds, then someone is brave enough or foolhardy enough to say, "F*** it, I'm going public with this!"

Amen brother and amen
i totally agree on this
Shawn J

Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (6 Viewers)

Used Register

Time is a Shadow

Well-known member

http://mobro.co/saddinall

Used Register

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Used Register

Well-known member

Time is a Shadow

http://mobro.co/saddinall

Well-known member

Well-known member

http://mobro.co/saddinall

Well-known member

oh those woodepckers

Well-known member

oh those woodepckers

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread