-- Pressing On --

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The previously-cited open access article is swirling around the Web on science sites, blogs, and news pages. I'm always a bit (pleasantly) surprised when these open-access IBWO studies get such widespread attention. I s'pose it has something to do with the controversial nature of the topic and the general interest this bird attracts (some of PLoS's problems in dealing with Mike Collins' paper I believe have to do with the controversial nature of the subject matter as well --- a great thing about science is that it encourages putting all ideas/evidence out there on a table for all to shine a light on and judge, rather than assuming the correctness of a few, or even assuming that 'truth' can always be fixed in stone).

For the last two years I've seen routine skeptical remarks to the effect that no serious, or credible, or intelligent birder/scientist any longer considers the prior IBWO claims valid, nor sees any possibility for the bird's persistence. In actuality, amidst wide pessimism, there have always been scientists who view the species' existence as possible, and many others who are simply sitting on the fence awaiting more study --- they just don't happen to be as loud and vocal as the naysayers on the Web who feed off each other to render an impression of unanimity when there is none. A skeptic/commenter to a post below chimes in that this whole affair "has ruined so many reputations".... almost causes one to wonder how many reputations would be ruined if the Ivory-bill were to be conclusively documented?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------