• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (1 Viewer)

humminbird said:
Why should they stop? Because you demand it?

ha ha ha ha ROFLMAO

how come you unhumourous lot just parrot comments. Can't you be slightly original?

ha ha ha ha ha (not funny, is it?)

I hope they continue. They must have gone past the 'Oh Shit!' point a while back. But how to back out? No lone dispersing male here... more like at least 10 of them, maybe 20, maybe 30 or 40. It just gets better and better... Fitzcrow must be so happy we've forgotten him
 

MMinNY

Well-known member
There's more to it than that. I've been trying to help out taking some measurements around here, using the fish scale. Some of the nuances were not clear from the paper alone. Again, read the book before jumping to any conclusions..

IBWO_Agnostic said:
I've seen the info about measuring bark adhesion with the fish scale, measuring in the Choctaw and comparing it to areas around Auburn. But they have no data from KNOWN IBWO scaled trees. Without that, it's not that robust an analysis.
 

timeshadowed

Time is a Shadow
Since you have so much 'experience' finding rare birds, why not JOIN in on the search?

Until then, 'shut-up'!




Tim Allwood said:
Writing a book will not make one IBWO exist

or add any evidence

find a bird

or stop

now

T.
 

IBWO_Agnostic

Well-known member
timeshadowed said:
Until then, 'shut-up'!

Has Bill O'Reilly joined us?

Interesting to see the websites listed in the profile section for some of our members. Take a gander at Timeshadow's. It's fascinating. Although telling someone to 'shut-up' doesn't see very 'christian' to me.
 
Last edited:

Ilya Maclean

charlatan
timeshadowed said:
Since you have so much 'experience' finding rare birds, why not JOIN in on the search?

Until then, 'shut-up'!

I seem to recall you having a pop or two at Tim for suggesting others shouldn't post. Not that I'd go as far as to call you a hypocrite or anything;-). Looking for something you don't believe exists could be considered by many a complete waste of time, but then again I guess posting in excess of 10,000 posts on birdforum........ 8-P

Oh I do enjoy it when this thread descends into a mud-slinging contest

B :) B :) B :) ...

don't get too offended by Tim. Sometimes Brit humour just doesn't travel very well. Keep it up mate - your posts always give me a chuckle.
 
Last edited:
well, despite having lost my seat at the right hand side of the big man upstairs many moons ago, I will still turn the other cheek and forgive you dear.

There are more records of the Virgin Mary appearing, all by normal 'sensible' people, than the of the Lord God bird. Must be something in that as well...?

and don't get me going on those cow statues that drink milk

Tim
 

timeshadowed

Time is a Shadow
Please note that the phrase " 'shut-up' " had quote marks around it AND was preceeded by a request for Tim to join in the search himself for the IBWO. Anyone who is not willing to do something themselves should NOT knock the efforts of those who are searching, many of whom are doing so on their own dime, thus the the 'shut-up' phrase.

edited to add:
I was not asking Tim not to post in this thread - only saying that he should not be so critical of the search efforts of others when he is not willing to search himself.
 
Last edited:

IBWO_Agnostic

Well-known member
I don't think anyone 'knocks the efforts'. We knock the touting of flimsy, ambiguous evidence as anything more than flimsy, ambiguous evidence. Some of us knock the spending of government money to obtain flimsy, ambiguous evidence.

By your logic, I can't protest the Iraq war unless I go fight it.

As tax-payers and scientists, we reserve the right to comment on and protest that with which we disagree.
 

Bonsaibirder

http://mobro.co/saddinall
timeshadowed said:
Anyone who is not willing to do something themselves should NOT knock the efforts of those who are

With reference to Ilya's avatar, I don't need to be a football genious to confidently state that Peter Crouch's efforts on the football pitch for England are rubbish.

Fortunately I AM a footballing genious so I dont have to worry about your logic Timeshadowed. ;)

Cheers,
 

timeshadowed

Time is a Shadow
Another thing that I find very annoying about Tim's critical attitude toward the searchers is that he just 'pops in here' and 'drops a post' without ever bothering to READ the comments up-thread before he posts. That is sooooo much like an internet TROLL. Sorry, but that is just how I feel. Most others take the time to really join into the conversation, but Tim does not do this and THAT is what annoys me most.



IBWO_Agnostic said:
I don't think anyone 'knocks the efforts'. We knock the touting of flimsy, ambiguous evidence as anything more than flimsy, ambiguous evidence. Some of us knock the spending of government money to obtain flimsy, ambiguous evidence.

By your logic, I can't protest the Iraq war unless I go fight it.

As tax-payers and scientists, we reserve the right to comment on and protest that with which we disagree.
 

Mike Johnston

Well-known member
timeshadowed said:
Another thing that I find very annoying about Tim's critical attitude toward the searchers is that he just 'pops in here' and 'drops a post' without ever bothering to READ the comments up-thread before he posts. That is sooooo much like an internet TROLL. Sorry, but that is just how I feel. Most others take the time to really join into the conversation, but Tim does not do this and THAT is what annoys me most.
I seem to recall you also accusing Tom Nelson of being a troll when he posted here (2005), when all he was doing was questioning the evidence that Cornell had presented.
 

Rick Wright Tucson

Well-known member
Single copies of Birding issue available

The new Birding is devoted to the affaire Ivory-bill. There are a few copies available as 'premiums' to donors to the American Birding Association; call Brenda at 1-800-850-2473 to offer a donation.
 

martin kitching

Obsessed seawatcher
Mike Johnston said:
I seem to recall you also accusing Tom Nelson of being a troll when he posted here (2005), when all he was doing was questioning the evidence that Cornell had presented.

Hi all

I haven't posted in this thread for a while but have been following it with great interest.

Hmmmm while I was still contributing to this thread, I was PM'd and accused of being a troll. And my crime? I asked a contributor, who regularly demands that other posters read all of the up-thread comments, to stop persistently misquoting my posts.

Anyway guys, post #10000 approaches B :) and the debate isn't really much further forward. What are the odds on it reaching 20000 without any convincing evidence?

cheers
martin
 

dacol

Well-known member
In the most recent issue of "Birding", the magazine from the American Birding Association, there is a very interesting article by William Sweeney describing his sighting of a female Ivory-billed Woodpecker in the Congaree Swamp National Monument (now Congaree National Park, near Columbia, SC) in March of 1987. The article includes Sweeney's description of his encounters with other people that have seen IBWOs in SC and FL. This is in the March/April 2007 [Vol. 39, No. 2] issue of "Birding". It doesn't seem to be available on line though.

Dalcio
 
Last edited:

chris murphy

Used Register
timeshadowed said:
Another thing that I find very annoying about Tim's critical attitude toward the searchers is that he just 'pops in here' and 'drops a post' without ever bothering to READ the comments up-thread before he posts. That is sooooo much like an internet TROLL. Sorry, but that is just how I feel. Most others take the time to really join into the conversation, but Tim does not do this and THAT is what annoys me most.

Sorry, but how do you know he doesn't read all the comments upthread? Are you sitting on his shoulder as he types?
 

chris murphy

Used Register
martin kitching said:
Hi all

I haven't posted in this thread for a while but have been following it with great interest.

Hmmmm while I was still contributing to this thread, I was PM'd and accused of being a troll. And my crime? I asked a contributor, who regularly demands that other posters read all of the up-thread comments, to stop persistently misquoting my posts.

Anyway guys, post #10000 approaches B :) and the debate isn't really much further forward. What are the odds on it reaching 20000 without any convincing evidence?

cheers
martin

Troll, be gone with you! ;)
 

Sancho

Registered User
Supporter
Troll, be gone with you! ;)
What's a Troll? (Ooh, I nearly made post 10,000!). No, seriously folks, what's a troll (apart from the hairy bad-tempered woodland folk of Scandinavian origin that pop up in fantasy literature)?
 

colonelboris

Right way up again
Someone who tries to cause trouble for fun on forums by winding people up.
Apparently, someone on the other forum I use is doing the opposite (or 'billy-goating') by inviting a troll to the forum and beating them to an online death.

Edit: Oh dear, appear to have hit the big 10K. I'd better say something IBWO-y...

What about using IR cameras at night? The b***ers have got to sleep sometime...
 

humminbird

Well-known member
chris murphy said:
Sorry, but how do you know he doesn't read all the comments upthread? Are you sitting on his shoulder as he types?

Read his posts. It is very easy to see. Not only that, but he personally says he "does not have time for that".
 

Sancho

Registered User
Supporter
Thanks for that, Colonelboris. Congratulations on getting post 10,000! You should get a prize of a holiday to a swamp in Louisiana with an IR camera and a sleeping-bag. It's very hard from this side of the big pond to understand what's going on with IBWO. I've been following this thread for ages, maybe 'cos we live on small islands without great tracts of wilderness, it's difficult to see how the thing has not been conclusively pinned down yet. So many folk swear they've seen it, and yet there's nothing concrete yet. It's impossible to prove a negative, but proving a positive shouldn't have taken this long, one would have thought? It's a pity things get so personal, though. Birders should be able to hold conflicting opinions without getting into online fisticuffs... tolerance and freedom of belief and all that. ;)
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top