-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Evidence for the Survival of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter buck3m
- Start date
- Status
gws said:Tom? Tom?? You out there, Tom? What about you, Buck?
Please read posts #259 and #260 and get back to us with your thoughts, fellows. Thanks for your prompt attention to this matter.
OK. Let me see if I've got this straight:
In the 1935 they got good film of an ivory-bill. You can clearly hear the wingbeats. They indicate a wingbeat rate of 8.6 beats per second. (I believe the 1935 bird was filmed from a blind as it left it's nest.)
In the Cornell video, there are a few extremely blurry seconds of some bird flying away from the camera. You can't hear it. The wingbeat rate is 8.7 beats per second.
Cornell describes the bird in their video as flying in "escape flight." If I'm not mistaken, escape flight is essentially a "sprint." So shouldn't the wingbeat rate be much faster than the 8.6 beats per second indicated in the 1935 film? If so, the Cornell video wingbeat of 8.7/second actually is evidence against it being an ivory-bill.
Once again, let me point out that while the confirmed Ivory-bill sightings pre-1945 repeatedly reported loud flight, the Cornell team members apparently NEVER heard the loud wingbeats.
timeshadowed
Time is a Shadow
buck3m said:
OK, Buck, where is your film proving that the pileated woodpecker can actually fly with a wingbeat of 8.7/second??
Without such evidence, your argument falls as flat as a pancake!
TimeShadowed
Timeshadowed: An alarmed Ivory-bill WOULD beat its wings faster than a calm one, correct? Therefore the Cornell video should show a much faster wingbeat IF it shows an Ivory-bill.
I see no reason that an alarmed Pileated Woodpecker couldn't easily beat its wings at that speed. If an average wingbeat of a Pileated is 5.2 beats per second, it seems logical that an alarmed bird could fly at 8.7 beats per second. That's only 67% faster than average.
I see no reason that an alarmed Pileated Woodpecker couldn't easily beat its wings at that speed. If an average wingbeat of a Pileated is 5.2 beats per second, it seems logical that an alarmed bird could fly at 8.7 beats per second. That's only 67% faster than average.
timeshadowed
Time is a Shadow
"Cornell describes the bird in their video as flying in 'escape flight.' " - - Buck
Buck,
"could have" - "should have" - "might have" - "would have" - "may have"
These terms have been used by both you and Tom throughout this thread. These terms are mere speculation terms, not real facts. They show no REAL proof. They are used only to create doubt in the minds of the readers and as such cannot be used as 'proof' that the film shows a Pileated Woodpecker rather than an IBWO.
Just because "Cornell describes the bird in their video as flying in 'escape flight.' ", you cannot just ASSUME that the wing beats 'would have been faster than normal' or that the bird was indeed 'frightened' enough to fly faster than normal. Again this is mere speculation on your part. It is NOT a fact.
Again, I ask you for photographic proof that a Pileated Woodpecker can attain 'a wingbeat of 8.7/second'. It should not be too difficult to find a Pileated Woodpecker at rest, set up a video camera and frighten the Pileated by moving closer to it. That would set the stage for the same situation as the one in the Cornell film.
I repeat:
Without such evidence, your argument falls as flat as a
pancake!
TimeShadowed
Buck,
"could have" - "should have" - "might have" - "would have" - "may have"
These terms have been used by both you and Tom throughout this thread. These terms are mere speculation terms, not real facts. They show no REAL proof. They are used only to create doubt in the minds of the readers and as such cannot be used as 'proof' that the film shows a Pileated Woodpecker rather than an IBWO.
Just because "Cornell describes the bird in their video as flying in 'escape flight.' ", you cannot just ASSUME that the wing beats 'would have been faster than normal' or that the bird was indeed 'frightened' enough to fly faster than normal. Again this is mere speculation on your part. It is NOT a fact.
Again, I ask you for photographic proof that a Pileated Woodpecker can attain 'a wingbeat of 8.7/second'. It should not be too difficult to find a Pileated Woodpecker at rest, set up a video camera and frighten the Pileated by moving closer to it. That would set the stage for the same situation as the one in the Cornell film.
I repeat:
Without such evidence, your argument falls as flat as a
pancake!
TimeShadowed
jeepnut said:
I have seen wolverines several times, bobcats several times, and marten many times. I've seen the tracks of cougar and I personally know many people who've seen them.
On finding the remains of rare creatures: My point is that there are a lot of ways to prove the existence of relatively rare creatures with a carcass being just one of them. Let's take bears for example, and let's imagine there's some controversy as to whether or not there are still bears in North America.
I've been lucky to see many bears. If I reported a sighting to someone who didn't know me, they may or may not believe me. However, I could show them photos of bears I've seen. I could show them video I've taken. I could bring them one of several skulls I've found through the years. I could show them photos of fresh tracks. I could bring them bear hair (which I've found dozens and dozens of times, on barbed wire fences, along the edges of trails, and on bear "marking trees.") I could submit samples of bear droppings for DNA analysis.
There are lots of ways to prove that Ivory-bills exist. If they do, someone can certainly produce feathers or photos or egg-shells or something that doesn't depend on subjective interpretation to be considered "proof."
timeshadowed
Time is a Shadow
buck3m said:
You demand more 'proof' from IBWO believers, yet you say you do not need to prove 'your assumptions".
Now THAT is really interesting and unfair, Buck!
TimeShadowed
Last edited:
Wompoo Dove
Well-known member
buck3m said:
My point here is that if a common species practically in my backyard like pileated goes undiscovered when dead, then why would it be even a point worth examining that there are no ivory billed carcasses? I have found a lot of the debate here very thought provoking but find this point at best weak and perhaps even irrelevant. I would love to hear from others who have found pileated carcasses in the field. I doubt that I will hear from many.
I guess my point about pileated carcasses is irrelevant... or is it? Any feedback?
Don
choupique1
Well-known member
wing beat noise.....
1. several of the cornell sightings were in audible range of something that would drown out the sound of wingbeats....
2. nobody said they DID NOT hear them(the wing beats), the just did not say that they heard them... big, big difference...
also.... if the bird starts it's flight WITH a heavy wind rather than INTO it, the noise is almost nonexistent....same with woodcock....quail and other birds....
1. several of the cornell sightings were in audible range of something that would drown out the sound of wingbeats....
2. nobody said they DID NOT hear them(the wing beats), the just did not say that they heard them... big, big difference...
also.... if the bird starts it's flight WITH a heavy wind rather than INTO it, the noise is almost nonexistent....same with woodcock....quail and other birds....
choupique1
Well-known member
buck... have you read actual reports?
curunir said:
I'll give you the same answer I gave you the last time you asked, I don't think they're incompetent, nor do I they're infallible. People make mistakes. A lot. With the brief, distant looks people were getting, and with aberrant Pileated Woodpeckers in the area, I'd EXPECT there to be reports of Ivory-Bills, especially with a whole team dedicated to the search. You don't have to be incompetent or deceptive to make simple, honest mistakes.
Last edited:
Wompoo Dove
Well-known member
buck3m said:
and with abherrant Pileated Woodpeckers in the area, I'd EXPECT there to be reports of Ivory-Bills,
I wonder how many abherrant Pileated Woodpeckers are flying around? Any idea?
Don
curunir said:
Casey Taylor of Cornell was the observer for the only reported "robust sighting" since June 2004. I don't have anything against Casey, and I'm not saying she necessarily made a mistake, but I do think that calling her "one of the best bird people in the nation" is a stretch.
At this link, scroll down to the end to get an idea of her experience:
http://www.plantations.cornell.edu/education/internships/2004statements.cfm
- Status
Similar threads
