• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (7 Viewers)

Maybe Tmguy could organize a seance. Everyone hold hands around the cypress tree......listen carefully you can hear the double rapping...maybe the bird will even appear to you...if you don't mind it being the same one in his photograph.

Why are you being so cruel to tmguy?
Just because you don't agree with what he says regarding the IBWO does not give you the license to issue a personal attack against him.
 
Why are you being so cruel to tmguy?
Just because you don't agree with what he says regarding the IBWO does not give you the license to issue a personal attack against him.

if you fake evidence and continue to make outlandish unsupported claims then I'm afraid you do leave yourself open to attack. Nevertheless, I do think he deserves some pity.

Rob
 
... once thought extinct but recentley discovered in Arkansas.

Is this true and if so what are all you lot still doing discussing this bird thats no longer extinct.

Cheers

Darryl H

we are discussing whether its true. don't think you can be 'no longer extinct', you either are or you aren't. once you are....

Rob
 
if you fake evidence and continue to make outlandish unsupported claims then I'm afraid you do leave yourself open to attack. Nevertheless, I do think he deserves some pity.

Rob

You can not 'prove' that he 'faked evidence' anymore than the existence of the IBWO is 'proven' by what information has been released so far.
 
Last edited:
You can not 'prove' that he 'faked evidence' anymore than the existence of the IBWO is 'proven' by what information has been released so far.

I wonder how many pages would be saved on this thread if the same tired old arguments didn't have to be rehashed again and again?

As it happens there is rather more evidence for one than the other...namely a photo ;)
 
The photo is genuine, the bird is not. I repeat, look at the photo.

Ok, I'll change my wording a little - same meaning:

Although you may 'assume' it is a faked bird in the photo, using the criteria that has been presented in this thread, you cannot 'prove' anything.
 
Last edited:
Ok, I'll change my wording a little - same meaning:

Although you may 'assume' it is a faked bird in the photo, using the criteria that has been presented in this thread, you cannot 'prove' anything.

no, how could I? in any case there's little point debating it as even the firm believers in IBWO don't take it seriously do they?

Rob
 
I don't recall anyone saying that they believed it was real. I even recall a couple of firm believers coming off the fence and saying they thought it was a fake.
 
I see the whole wary argument is rearing it's ugly head again. Rather than rehashing it, I'll refer you to where it was pretty much debunked first time round:

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=825259

TMGuy - I've got a mate called Steve who sees fairies whenever he wants to. He's rather partial to certain types of mushroom. A hundred bucks says you're full of sh*t and won't get a photo of a real IBWO
 
The whole point behind this little exchange is:

If you do not have real 'proof' that the bird in tmguy's photo is fake - then don't be so cruel to the the guy!

Y'all play nice now.



Ok, I'll change my wording a little - same meaning:

Although you may 'assume' it is a faked bird in the photo, using the criteria that has been presented in this thread, you cannot 'prove' anything.

no, how could I? in any case there's little point debating it as even the firm believers in IBWO don't take it seriously do they?

Rob

I don't recall anyone saying that they believed it was real. I even recall a couple of firm believers coming off the fence and saying they thought it was a fake.

Why are you being so cruel to tmguy?
Just because you don't agree with what he says regarding the IBWO does not give you the license to issue a personal attack against him.
 
Farnborough John said:
An extinct Nearctic bird species

or one of these seen briefly

attachment.php
 
Last edited:
The whole point behind this little exchange is:

If you do not have real 'proof' that the bird in tmguy's photo is fake - then don't be so cruel to the the guy!

What's with your obsession with 'proof'?

We can tell it's fake because we've spent time watching real birds. It's called birdwatching - a popular, widespread passtime. There are websites dedicated to it, and everything.
 
If you do not have real 'proof' that the bird in tmguy's photo is fake - then don't be so cruel to the the guy!

ha, since when did you develop such an interest in the importance of proof!?

Anyway, see my critique a few pages back focussing on the impossibility of an IBWO having that configuration of white on the neck sides when the neck is not stretched out if you want some proof. And that's leaving aside the fact that everyone here who has any real experience of looking at real birds (and some that don't) have come to the conclusion that it stinks. How much proof do you require? What would constitute proof for you?.

The real cruelty was perpetrated by the fraudster in giving a (very brief) glimmer of hope to all the hard of thinking believers who desperately crave some 'proof', what a rotter!

Rob
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top