Ivory-billed Woodpecker (formerly updates) (3 Viewers)

[tmguy]

This is the whole picture. I am amazed that so much scrutiny can be applied to a living animal. It is laughable and reminds me of how self centered mankind really is. People need instant gratification, "show me all of your pics", I give one good one and so much is read into it. Orange trees, buildings, crest isn't right, there's shadows and light, I took the picture and this is what you have. I cannot tell the birds to sit still while I photograph them. But you know what? I don't see too many people coming down the pike with a portfolio full of pics. A few people have them and the sneering is why the other people haven't come on and shown theirs. I am trying to change that, I am trying to share information and I will stop when it becomes a circus.

Regarding Tim's comment about my exchange with Illinois Birder, go to his blog, read it, and read the e-mails I get from him and his minion. Let my wife tell you about the phone calls we get at 4:30 am that the phone company has tracked to illinois.

I'll make available more pics when the time comes.

Bill

 

[Jane Turner]

From the paper above:

"The birds were surprisingly easy to stalk, even after being hunted and shot at for several days, but were difficult to secure because they are powerful, hard-muscled creatures possessed of remarkable vitality. They showed considerable attachment to one another and when one was shot the other members of the flock remained scattered about on the trees for a short time calling each other at intervals."

(I know they are talking about Imperials, but they are pretty closely related, so it seemed pertinent).

Here is a similar vintage descritpion of Ivory-billeds.

http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=51936
http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=51938
http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=51939
http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=51940
http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=51941

 

[OwlTalon]

I also see a bit of a point in tmguy's photo anyway.

I can as well, especially when I squinted to see the pupil. I know I'm not a regular poster here, and i am certainly not an expert on the ivory-bill, just an avid birdwatcher, I to think it looks real enough.

Would one be likely to choose such an unusual posture in a faked photo?

I agree there as well. Call me crazy, a kook, a liar, a madman, or whatever, but I'll defend the photo.

(Sorry again for just jumping in!)

 

[Mike Johnston]

This is the whole picture. I am amazed that so much scrutiny can be applied to a living animal. It is laughable and reminds me of how self centered mankind really is. People need instant gratification, "show me all of your pics", I give one good one and so much is read into it. Orange trees, buildings, crest isn't right, there's shadows and light, I took the picture and this is what you have. I cannot tell the birds to sit still while I photograph them. But you know what? I don't see too many people coming down the pike with a portfolio full of pics. A few people have them and the sneering is why the other people haven't come on and shown theirs. I am trying to change that, I am trying to share information and I will stop when it becomes a circus.

I'll make available more pics when the time comes.
Bill

You claim to have better photos than the one you have shown, ones that will silence the sceptics. Yet you claim this one as the 'good' one. Which is it?
If you do have better, what are you waiting for? When will the time come?
You cannot blame people for being sceptical. The bird in your pic looks quite settled. It seems reasonable that you could have shot more than one photo. Even better if it showed the bird in movement. And to hint you have better while not revealing them until the 'right' time only causes suspicion.

 

[Jane Turner]

This is the whole picture. I am amazed that so much scrutiny can be applied to a living animal.

I don't see how you can be amazed. If I looked out of my window right now and saw a Great Auk swim by, I'd expect to:-

a. Get a lot of attention

b. Feel that the onus was on me to prove that it was living, breathing etc

Heck if it were only a Bruinnich's Guillemot (Thick-billed Murre) the same would hold true.

 

[Andrew Whitehouse]

I don't see how you can be amazed. If I looked out of my window right now and saw a Great Auk swim by, I'd expect to:-

a. Get a lot of attention

b. Feel that the onus was on me to prove that it was living, breathing etc

Heck if it were only a Bruinnich's Guillemot (Thick-billed Murre) the same would hold true.

Don't worry Jane - I'd believe you. Or I'd be round your house to have whatever it is you've been drinking

 

[timeshadowed]

This is the whole picture.Bill

Thanks for sharing this bigger version of the picture, Bill.
It is a lot easier to see the details at this size.

Don't let the 'babies' on this forum put you off. They just like to pick on those who they think are not as 'smart' as they are. But it is 'they' who really need to 'grow-up' to match their adult bodies.

Could you give a link to that blog as it doesn't come up in his profile. Or are you saying that this fellow is using more then one ID on this forum?

TimeShadowed

 

[Mike Johnston]

Thanks for sharing this bigger version of the picture, Bill.
It is a lot easier to see the details at this size.

Don't let the 'babies' on this forum put you off. They just like to pick on those who they think are not as 'smart' as they are. But it is 'they' who really need to 'grow-up' to match their adult bodies.

TimeShadowed

The details are exactly the same!

How exactly is he being picked on? He's presumably a big boy. If you're prepared to post photos of IBWO on the web, then you should damn well be prepared to defend them.

 

[theveeb]

Bill,

Thanks for posting the full photo.

This better resolution image shows feather detail on the dorsal patch, possibly some on the back. It does not show a pupil. If you zoomed in on the low-res version there weren't enough pixels to resolve a pupil. If you resize this image I think you get a similar effect. The "white stripe" on the crest look like a highlight from sunlight, same yellowish tinge as other highlights in the image, nothing of interest there.

So was this bird hopping along this branch?

don c.

 

[lewis20126]

This is the whole picture. I am amazed that so much scrutiny can be applied to a living animal. It is laughable and reminds me of how self centered mankind really is. People need instant gratification, "show me all of your pics", I give one good one and so much is read into it. Orange trees, buildings, crest isn't right, there's shadows and light, I took the picture and this is what you have. I cannot tell the birds to sit still while I photograph them. But you know what? I don't see too many people coming down the pike with a portfolio full of pics. A few people have them and the sneering is why the other people haven't come on and shown theirs. I am trying to change that, I am trying to share information and I will stop when it becomes a circus.

Bill

This whole thread is a circus from beginning to end.

Its not difficult to spot the clowns.

 

[Snowy1]

The details are exactly the same!

How exactly is he being picked on? He's presumably a big boy. If you're prepared to post photos of IBWO on the web, then you should damn well be prepared to defend them.

Mike, you have no patience. Why so hasty? We are trying to have an honest discussion. From the sound of things, Bill has already been harassed far beyond anything I would tolerate. If I was getting phone calls at 4:30 in the morning, I would certainly stop posting any photos on the web. He has come back here to try and bridge the gap and to get the ball rolling again. Bill has his own reasons (of which we may or may not understand) regarding the release of his photos. Let's all take our time and be less demanding. Yes, I understand this is an important issue and yes, he has made significant claims that require verification but let's give the process a chance to unfold.

 

[Snowy1]

This whole thread is a circus from beginning to end.

Its not difficult to spot the clowns.

I think we found one. Insulting people is pointless - forums are for discussion.

 

[Andrew R.]

Thanks for the full photo. The higher resolution shows that the part of the stripe that appears to extend beyond its back is not contiguous with the dorsal stripe, so is not part of the bird. And as someone above mentioned, the "stripe" on the crest is apparently something behind the bird, not part of its plumage.

The nearly perfectly straight edge to the white on the wings seems strange, but I don't know if that's of significance or not.

Looking forward to seeing more of your photos...

 

[Snowy1]

Thanks for the full photo. The higher resolution shows that the part of the stripe that appears to extend beyond its back is not contiguous with the dorsal stripe, so is not part of the bird. And as someone above mentioned, the "stripe" on the crest is apparently something behind the bird, not part of its plumage.

The nearly perfectly straight edge to the white on the wings seems strange, but I don't know if that's of significance or not.

Looking forward to seeing more of your photos...

I also noticed that. The Fielding Lewis shots from 1971 also show that kind of straight edge. I don't think anything can be inferred from that, however. We'll hopefully see more shots as the time comes.

Thanks again Bill.

 

[Bonsaibirder]

I think we found one. Insulting people is pointless - forums are for discussion.

Snowy1 - if you care about people are insulting each other, then why didn't you post a similar response to this ?

Don't let the 'babies' on this forum put you off. They just like to pick on those who they think are not as 'smart' as they are. But it is 'they' who really need to 'grow-up' to match their adult bodies.
TimeShadowed

Surely you're not a hypocrite?

 

[Bonsaibirder]

Could you give a link to that blog as it doesn't come up in his profile. Or are you saying that this fellow is using more then one ID on this forum?
TimeShadowed

I think the blog you are looking for is probably this one. But you're not going to like it...

...and you're not going to like what tmguy said either. I can't vouch for the accuracy of what is claimed on this blog since tmguy's post was taken off VERY quickly but it sounds like Tim saw it.

 

[kyanite]

Bill,

Thanks very much for releasing the full image.

This version gives a completely different impression than the low-resolution version you had originally posted on your website. Honestly, that version had seemed to me to show a strangely grey-and-white decoy so smooth as to appear possibly even inflatable. The light markings seemed exaggerated, the posture difficult to understand, and yes, the dead vegetation did look a bit like an orange even if the tree was clearly not.

But this image is quite another thing. The bill, eye and white markings are not flared, the plumage can be partly resolved and understood as glossy black, and the camera and illumination artifacts (white stripe on crest, black underline to the bill etc.) are apparent as such.

Thank you again for releasing this version, and I look forward to seeing any other images you have, when and if you choose to share them.

 

[MMinNY]

Thanks Bill. I'm also very grateful that you've posted the full image, and I agree that it creates a very different impression. It doesn't look like a decoy in this photo. The posture is odd, but still photos can exaggerate such things and as has been pointed out, there's a strong similarity with one of Tanner's photos. All I see is white on the wing/back; I would expect to see black primaries from this angle, but there are records of birds with a lot of white on the primaries.

This link is probably nothing new, but it's worth re-reading in this context.

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA/demo/account/Ivory-billed_Woodpecker/APPEARANCE.html

Bill,

Thanks very much for releasing the full image.

This version gives a completely different impression than the low-resolution version you had originally posted on your website. Honestly, that version had seemed to me to show a strangely grey-and-white decoy so smooth as to appear possibly even inflatable. The light markings seemed exaggerated, the posture difficult to understand, and yes, the dead vegetation did look a bit like an orange even if the tree was clearly not.

But this image is quite another thing. The bill, eye and white markings are not flared, the plumage can be partly resolved and understood as glossy black, and the camera and illumination artifacts (white stripe on crest, black underline to the bill etc.) are apparent as such.

Thank you again for releasing this version, and I look forward to seeing any other images you have, when and if you choose to share them.

 

[Mike Johnston]

So is no-one concerned with what Tmguy supposedly accused IllinoisBirder of here on the Forum when he was challenged a few days ago? The Birding is Not a Crime blogger saw it (scroll down to Mr Guppy Goes Postal, and read the comments too), Tim saw it, I presume those who spend their time here saw it (and said nothing!?), and the moderator who deleted it certainly saw it (and will presumably verify if asked to)? And yet everything just carries on as normal? Yeah, great photo Bill. Thanks Bill. Thanks a lot.

 

[Sidewinder]

Frankly, having read Birding-is-Not-a-Crime's pathetic taunting of tmguy, I would have expected tmguy to use more offensive language. Anyone who visits the site would recognize that the blog author and his cronies suffer from paedomorphosis. Google that word.