--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After almost 4 years of blogging can't hide it any longer... in a misplaced effort to generate debate, discussion, controversy, and thus greater interest in this very blog, I must confess to readers that I, Cyberthrush, have been the author of ALL the "Anonymous" comments seen on this blog (and every other IBWO-related site for that matter) since day 1. I am sorry that my preoccupation with blog traffic led to this shameful effort to create controversy where there was little, and to hide the boring unanimity which exists out there for the Ivory-bill's persistence.
Oh, and while I'm at it I should probably also admit that at a different URL I pseudonymously post under the nom de plume "Mike Collins."
my deepest apologies to anyone who may feel they've been misled....
posted April 1, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 comments:
No, I'm Spartacus.
10 year anniversery of the Kullivan sighting. Was that another april fools joke?
Is it just coincidence that you picked the same day of the year (April 1) to confess, that a young graduate student at LSU picked 10 years ago to report to one of his professors that he sat with his camera in his backpack and watched as 2 ivory-bills cavorted in the woods in front of him?
We know your really Tom Nelson.
Boy, I worry about any "Anonymous" who even has to ask a question about something like this published on April 1st . . .
Come on up to Utah, there, Anonner; I've got some great beachfront property along the Great Salt Lake I'd love to show you . . .
Actually, the date of the Kullivan sighting is evidence of its validity. Who the hell in their right mind would report something like that if it weren't true?
concolor1
Salt Lake City
The biggest difference between Tom Nelson and Cyberthrush is that people clearly read and comment on CT's posts whereas there is little evidence that anyone is even visiting Nelson's site.
This may be why Tom doesn't fear the effects of global warming. It isn't like a major environmental catastrophe could decrease the number of comments on his blog.
Tom's views are now bought and paid for. By whom remains a good question, but it's so exciting to earn a living when you don't have to go outside and face the real world. It's virtual reality 24/7 (though curiously far, far from reality).
- Cyberthrush, Jr.
If all else fails and there are no woodpeckers around, why not attack Tom Nelson?
Tom's site is perhaps the best place to refute his odd ideas on climate change
Where are the comments? Why is no one leaving any? Is there any point to refuting them? Gonna change Tom's mind?
Tis odd indeed that no one leaves comments at Tom's website. Obviously, Tom's judgments are twisted.
If all else fails and there are no woodpeckers around, why not attack Tom Nelson?Tom is the one that ruined everything. Remember what a crackpot he was for not accepting the prestigious Cornell's paper? The Ivory-bill was still alive as long as people believed.
Post a Comment