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

[cajanuma]

He likes the Congaree, even heard a possible double knock there. Does that make him a stringer?

No, since as far as I can tell from the interview, he does not claim that the double-knock came from an IBWO...

 

[MMinNY]

Granted. He's careful not to. . .I guess that just makes it another "interesting" sound. And in response to a playback too.

No, since as far as I can tell from the interview, he does not claim that the double-knock came from an IBWO...

 

[Ilya Maclean]

As it is, you're making a mountain out of what may be a mere soundbyte.

Exchange the word "soundbyte" for "interesting sound" and I'm afraid we're left with an all to common traite amongst believers. Not that I'd ever resort to calling believers hypocrites or anything, even after their repeated complaints about personal attacks…;-)

 

[humminbird]

He might have video

I'll guarantee there's no identifiable IBWO in it

This demonstrates exactly what people have been saying for about the last 9,998 posts. Some people have their mind made up and refuse to be confused by the facts.

A more apropriate response would have been "He might have video, but I doubt it will include an identifiable IBWO." As it stands, Tim can only guarantee that there is no identifiable IBWO in it if he is convinced he will not accept any image on that clip.

Amazing how one who can approach the discussion with such a closed mind can acuse others of being unscientific. I thought that science was an adventure of discovery!

 

[MMinNY]

You're getting tangled up in your own wit, juxtaposing newspaper articles and field recordings, but whatever. . .

As for personal attacks -- I was addressing specifics about attitude and tactics of argumentation, not calling names or making general statements about character. Nothing hypocritical there. Not that you'd ever resort to making that sort of accusation or to making sweeping generalizations about "believers" for that matter.

QUOTE=Ilya Maclean;878421]Exchange the word "soundbyte" for "interesting sound" and I'm afraid we're left with an all to common traite amongst believers. Not that I'd ever resort to calling believers hypocrites or anything, even after their repeated complaints about personal attacks…;-)[/QUOTE]

 

[Edward woodwood]

This demonstrates exactly what people have been saying for about the last 9,998 posts. Some people have their mind made up and refuse to be confused by the facts.

A more apropriate response would have been "He might have video, but I doubt it will include an identifiable IBWO." As it stands, Tim can only guarantee that there is no identifiable IBWO in it if he is convinced he will not accept any image on that clip.

Amazing how one who can approach the discussion with such a closed mind can acuse others of being unscientific. I thought that science was an adventure of discovery!

not a closed mind

but experience

Maybe you'd like to donate £100 to the Oriental Bird Club if he doesn't come up with an identifiable IBWO in the video?

thought not

you may remember i was totally behind Cornell - until i looked at the evidence.

Tim

 

[Edward woodwood]

Given your disdain for things American, it's amusing that your attitude and tactics are in keeping with some of the worst aspects of the American political tradition -- the willful ignorance or know-nothingism ("aint read the book") of our current President (and so many other politicians, especially demagogic ones) and the bullying, character-assassinating approach of Joseph McCarthy.

Even if the passage Nelson quotes (which I read as being highly speculative and overly enthusiastic, and which is qualified by the observation that "if each pair needs 10 or 15 square miles. . .then my estimates would be way too high") were the source of the "nine pairs" rumor and, as you seem to be charging, Dr. Hill has been less than forthright in denying knowledge of how the rumor started, so what?

I don't buy that he's not being forthright; there are plenty of other plausible explanations.

Similarly, if Hill had a ghost-writer, so what? It's a very common practice, so common (sadly) that it's almost expected in the publishing industry.

Geoff Hill is a human being, like all of us. He undoubtedly has his flaws, but this kind of stuff is garbage. It has no bearing on the substance of what he has reported. That will stand or fall on its own merits.

As for Lammertink, he has a very strong set of opinions about what constitutes good habitat, and those opinions undoubtedly colored what he had to say about the Choctawhatchee. He likes the Congaree, even heard a possible double knock there. Does that make him a stringer? Who knows what other factors might be in play in his assessment -- institutional rivalry comes immediately to mind. I would certainly be interested (pardon the word) if he were to explain his position in more detail. As it is, you're making a mountain out of what may be a mere soundbyte.

sarcasm and a well-developed sense of irony my boy

the best things bout being English

I rather like Americans, for the record.

Making a mountain out of a GeoffHill should enter the lexicon of comon parlance - pardon my French

 

[MMinNY]

Tim, that was actually quite witty. First time in a long time you've gotten a chuckle out of me.

And with that. . .I think I'll go back to lurking.

 

[humminbird]

not a closed mind

but experience

Maybe you'd like to donate £100 to the Oriental Bird Club if he doesn't come up with an identifiable IBWO in the video?

thought not

you may remember i was totally behind Cornell - until i looked at the evidence.

Tim

Tell you what I will do Tim. Whether there is an Ivory-billed there or not, I will donate $150US more than I normally give to the "Adopt-a-Prairie Chicken" program, dedicated to restoration of the Attwater's race of Prairie Chicken when the video is released or before September 1 of this year, whichever comes first. Will you commit that 100 pounds to the Oriental Bird Club if there is an IBWO on the tape?

For information on the Attwater's Prairie Chicken or the Adopt program see www.tpwd.state.tx.us/apc.

Mark

 

[Edward woodwood]

I'd rather see it go to the OBC. Then I'll know you've coughed up

and yes, my 100 will go to wherever you want.

Tim

 

[Ilya Maclean]

You're getting tangled up in your own wit, juxtaposing newspaper articles and field recordings, but whatever. . .

As for personal attacks -- I was addressing specifics about attitude and tactics of argumentation, not calling names or making general statements about character. Nothing hypocritical there. Not that you'd ever resort to making that sort of accusation or to making sweeping generalizations about "believers" for that matter.

Since one of us is getting our knickers in a twist about my wit, I'll clarify. I wasn't suggesting that you were making personal attacks, just that certain believers had been.

Any back to the woodies: I'm actually genuinely curious as to how Cornell and Hill will back out of this one. Anybody care to hypothesise? My guess is they’ll continue to mislead us for a while with statements such as "we’ve only systematically covered a small percentage of the habitat” (most of the search has been unsystematic), “IBWOs are wary and have been scared away from the search area”, “we’ve only searched a fraction of the potential forests in the US” (all happening already). They’ll then gradually disown some of their bolder declarations (happening already). I guess eventually they’ll make up some bollocks about lack of sufficient funding for the search effort. They’ll then finish with a statement that IBWOS weren’t extinct when they were searching, but they probably are now, citing the Allee effect or something. In the mean time they’ll make as much money as possible writing books and giving talks and then retire from academia. They’ll tour the country giving talks to gullible members of the public making themselves out to be caring conservationists by bemoaning the fact we’ve driven the IBWO extinct (conveniently blurring exactly when).

 

[Ilya Maclean]

Tell you what I will do Tim. Whether there is an Ivory-billed there or not, I will donate $150US more than I normally give to the "Adopt-a-Prairie Chicken" program, dedicated to restoration of the Attwater's race of Prairie Chicken when the video is released or before September 1 of this year, whichever comes first. Will you commit that 100 pounds to the Oriental Bird Club if there is an IBWO on the tape?

For information on the Attwater's Prairie Chicken or the Adopt program see www.tpwd.state.tx.us/apc.

Mark

I'll second that. If you're willing to donate $100 US to the African Bird Club if there's no evidence by the end of the next search season (say this time next year), I'll donate $200 towards IBWO conservation the minute there's conclusive evidence of an IBWO and pay you the $100 back if the evidence comes after this time next year!

 

[lewis20126]

I'll second that. If you're willing to donate $100 US to the African Bird Club if there's no evidence by the end of the next search season (say this time next year), I'll donate $200 towards IBWO conservation the minute there's conclusive evidence of an IBWO and pay you the $100 back if the evidence comes after this time next year!

Thirded. I'll up the stakes as well if any believers are happy to reciprocate. Perhaps one of the ones with an identity anyway.

As well as the donation, I'll also eat my hat (or was it my boots?, anyway see earlier post for details of that gastro treat)

Alan

 

[MMinNY]

Since you were responding to my post, I took it the comments were directed at me. Glad to know I was mistaken.

I will get in on this pledge thing as well. I'm good for 100 pounds. End of next season. Need some definition about what constitutes conclusive proof. Lewis (Alan), name your bird conservation organization. I'm off for the night, but we can work out the details tomorrow. At least some good may come of all this.

Since one of us is getting our knickers in a twist about my wit, I'll clarify. I wasn't suggesting that you were making personal attacks, just that certain believers had been.

Any back to the woodies: I'm actually genuinely curious as to how Cornell and Hill will back out of this one. Anybody care to hypothesise? My guess is they’ll continue to mislead us for a while with statements such as "we’ve only systematically covered a small percentage of the habitat” (most of the search has been unsystematic), “IBWOs are wary and have been scared away from the search area”, “we’ve only searched a fraction of the potential forests in the US” (all happening already). They’ll then gradually disown some of their bolder declarations (happening already). I guess eventually they’ll make up some bollocks about lack of sufficient funding for the search effort. They’ll then finish with a statement that IBWOS weren’t extinct when they were searching, but they probably are now, citing the Allee effect or something. In the mean time they’ll make as much money as possible writing books and giving talks and then retire from academia. They’ll tour the country giving talks to gullible members of the public making themselves out to be caring conservationists by bemoaning the fact we’ve driven the IBWO extinct (conveniently blurring exactly when).

 

[lewis20126]

Since you were responding to my post, I took it the comments were directed at me. Glad to know I was mistaken.

I will get in on this pledge thing as well. I'm good for 100 pounds. End of next season. Need some definition about what constitutes conclusive proof. Lewis (Alan), name your bird conservation organization. I'm off for the night, but we can work out the details tomorrow. At least some good may come of all this.

MM

Conservation Funds of:
Oriental Bird Club (you know you should), Neotropical Bird Club or African Bird Club. You decide. US$200 fine by me.

Proof? A good photo (no need for a National Geographic Cover but excludes wooden models or 6 pixel efforts). I'm off to Central Asia for a few weeks but looking forward to developments during the interim (predictions - nothing at all)

Hey, isn't gambling fun? Top tip: Never back a dead horse.

A

 

[humminbird]

I'll second that. If you're willing to donate $100 US to the African Bird Club if there's no evidence by the end of the next search season (say this time next year), I'll donate $200 towards IBWO conservation the minute there's conclusive evidence of an IBWO and pay you the $100 back if the evidence comes after this time next year!

I was not trying to get into a "betting" situation. The point of my post was, whether the IBWO is present or not, we need to support the birds we love so much more than many of us do presently. Iyla and Tim, expect a PM from me. Others, as I have opportunity to, I will be happy to meet pledge challenges.

 

[curunir]

I was not trying to get into a "betting" situation. The point of my post was, whether the IBWO is present or not, we need to support the birds we love so much more than many of us do presently. Iyla and Tim, expect a PM from me. Others, as I have opportunity to, I will be happy to meet pledge challenges.

Okay guys, simple question. If we toss money across the pond is it deductible as a charitable contribution, and in what cases?

 

[John Mariani]

Have you actually read Hill's book? I'm guessing no. He makes no claims about knowing exactly how many pairs there might be. Based on what he has seen there and the amount of available habitat, it's just an educated guess. It has never been passed off as anything but that.

Martjan is turning on them now huh? I can't wait to see how you've twisted and exaggerated that one.

From interview with Lammertink: “The Choctawhatchee, of all the places we worked in, was one of the less optimal forests for ivory-billeds. There’s not a high density of other woodpeckers, not as many large trees. I don’t think (the claims) are well-supported by the body of evidence.”

No exageration required.

Mary Scott on her web site claimed that discovery of 9 pairs would soon be revealed immediately prior to the Auburn announcement. After the announcement, when it became clear that proof of 9 pairs would not be forthcoming, the reference to 9 pairs disappeared from her web site. Between that and the paragraph from Hill's book it's ridiculous to call it a numeric coincidence. It's pretty clear where the rumor of 9 pairs started...

 

[John Mariani]

Responding to factual information by resorting to ad hominem attacks from behind an anonymous screen name says a great deal about the absolute paucity of worthwhile evidence about the continued existence of IBWO.martin

Anonymous screen name? You mean Tuna Slushie isn't her real name? |8.| Maybe I shouldn't assume Tuna is a she, just something about the name... 3

 

[John Mariani]

aint read the book, never been to the states - neither appeals for some reason.

Lots of birds here in the states, check it out some time!

I'm won't buy the book either, unless they come up with that one good photo. The book's in expensive hardback!!! And I have limited space left in my library, having bought all the other IBWO books...

Plus you get many and you might look...obsessed, like someone who has a whole library of alien abduction literature and Von Daniken books....