"....The truth is out there."
-- Dr. Jerome Jackson, 2002 (... & Agent Fox Mulder)
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
"All truth passes through 3 stages: First it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as self-evident."
-- Arthur Schopenhauer
Thursday, April 10, 2008
-- FWIW --
...and elsewhere on the Web:
If this picture is any indication of mutations-to-be, I s'pose any photograph of a purported Ivory-billed Woodpecker is also now useless as evidence; we will need DNA!
....and some more remarkable pics here (nothing to do with IBWOs):
What we are faced with here is not so much simple passivity or mistrust of new ideas as an active approach which can be divided into several stages.
(1) A contradiction to the system appears unthinkable
(2) What does not fit into the system remains unseen;
(3) alternatively, if it is noticed, either it is kept secret, or
(4) laborious efforts are made to explain an exception in terms that do not contradict the system.
(5) Despite the legitimate claims of contradictory views, one only tends to see, describe, or even illustrate those circumstances which corroborate current views and thereby give them substance.
What does not fit the theory is thus excluded. The anomalous event is forced outside the official circle of consciousness into a kind of outlaw existence.
This seems, to me, to be a perfect explanation of what went on with the Cornell team in Arkansas, and the Auburn team in Florida. Both came to the idea very quickly that the IBWO existed at these sites, and that it had been seen/detected. (I think one of the Auburn team claimed to have seen one within the first hour of searching.) They then actively discarded and discounted any alternative explanations for the "detections", such as other species, inexperienced observers, expectation bias. Failure to obtain recognizable photographs was explained away by more and more baroque explanations. (Bird nomadic, bird super shy, ...) Legitimate criticisms and alternative analysis of date (Sibley, Collinson) is discarded in a most irrational fashion--it becomes "outlaw science" with only the believer view valid.
Yes, this is an excellent description of the believer point of view. I hate to quote The-Blog-that-shall-not-be-named, but this is exactly what Nelson talked about with Ivorybill "Groupthink". You have hit the nail on the head.
And the fact that people still have sightings of this bird and either don't or have very rare ones for the Eskimo Curlew and Bachman's Warbler makes it all the more likely to me that the IBWO survives while the other said species do not!
And answer this skeptics please don't you find it reasonable that if you have 2 or 3 birds in 40-50+ square miles of forest that it would be nearly impossible to get a good photo of them???
As I get more and more sickened by this whole state of affairs. You really really depress me!
No. It should be a virtual certainty that someone would get a good quality photo. Do believers actually think 100% of the birds can avoid skilled photographers or automatic cameras 100% of the time for 6 decades? Obviously, they do. I don't know a single objective, experienced birder that does however.
There are lots more Elvis sightings than James Dean sightings, but I don't think that makes it more likely that Elvis is still alive.
I know what the fevered imaginations of Believers can do after seeing the Collins and Cornell videos. If they positively identify Ivory-bills in those videos I understand why they keep spotting them, but not getting a good photo, in the wild.
And I ask what the bird in the most recent Collin's video is? there don't seem to be many choices other than a duck or IBWO, and I don't think that's a duck. Unless ducks have trailing white panels on the dorsal surfaces of their wings (like this bird appears to have in multiple frames) and tuck their wings in flight.
I actually see things in this video without having to have it pointed out to me. Unlike others I've seen.
Possible, or probable?
I disagree very strongly with this as I am not aware of ONE "good quality" birder who claims to have seen the bird well.
And the 'new' Collins video is surely not being discussed in a serious manner? I mean, just look at it!
If you can see an identifiable bird species in it, then you're kidding yourself.
It is unidentifiable. Stop stringing.
I dunno I just wonder what it could be and it does make sense for an IBWO to me!
And, yes, good quality birders have seen IBWO's recently. They're so gawdy and different from pileateds that they should be pretty easy to diffentiate.
You don't call Hicks an excellent birder? from what I've read about him he's among the best.
skeptics, skeptics, gesh! you should really use your eyes and brains for something more befitting you. Bashing others and spitting crap is not positive! Pot, kettle.
I mean this is just such an awesome bird that I am really pulling for it to be confirmed with a good photo! I just wish some wouldn't be so mean and seemingly wanting this bird to be extinct. I mean don't we all have hope for this world with all the bad things that are happening??
I'm just thinking it deserves better.
'they should be pretty easy to differentiate' you say. A typical comment from a novice at bird id.
Have you not noticed that the only videos purporting to be IBWO are those videos too poor to identify the bird to any degree of certainty.
And no, Hicks isn't a great birder at all. Rather average and a loose cannon, I hear, from people who've met him.
Links to this post: