"....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
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
-- What's David Up To? --
I agree that it was a mistake to add color to the interpretive sketches that I did for the Science paper. Those should have been simple outlines showing my interpretation of the position of the bird. I disagree that there are any frames showing "obvious pale color" on the body, but it's also not clear that the body is definitely black, and drawing it that way provides an easy target and a distraction from the more important point which is simply the position of the wings and body in each frame.
Got anything to say on that one?
The scientists here know that it's impossible by definition to "prove a negative," i.e. there are no more Ivory-bills...
It's reasonable to conclude there may be no more IBWO's, but it's also reasonable to conclude they may indeed persist... What I've seen on the former is a lot of "Because I say so" justification, which is wholly unscientific.
Given the material that's reached my inbox, I also think the issue of credible eyewitness reports has to be addressed. And that's coming from an essentially uninvolved "lurker" who's a thousand miles away from "ground zero" but did grow up in the "Bigfoot Propaganda Capital" of the United States. I didn't solicit any of the IBWO reports although I welcome them and have enjoyed the "conversation." We've also got quite a few UFO believers here, and trust me on that one, I can tell the difference...
UFO and Sassie believers are mostly hostile sorts (Jeffrey Meldrum is an exception, but he's also pretty much just a gonzo drama llama who's been thoroughly discredited by his peers); IBWO "supporters" haven't been noticeably hostile except when confronted with strawmen and shell games...
So you can't prove the Luneau video is not a Pileated, right? And you can't prove the stuffed Ivory-bills are not actually ducks?
"any claim can be expressed as a negative" Stephen Hales.
To address your strawman-flavored analogy, one "proves the positive" which therefore "eliminates a negative" from consideration. Or at least from reasonable consideration.
The stuffed ivory-bills are not ducks because they are something else. It therefore becomes unreasonable to suggest they are something ducks.
That's strictly dichotomous/black-and-white stuff you're trying to engage with that Luneau video claim, and if you were genuinely looking at matters objectively--noting that some are certain it's an IBWO, and some believe equally strongly it's not--you'd recognize the only black-and-white is found in the bird's feathers, regardless of whether it's an IBWO or a PWO.
And that's a shell game tactic with that "claims can be expressed as a negative" that you tossed in there. Of course they can, but in order to then disprove that negative, you have to "prove a corresponding positive" which eliminates it from hypothetical consideration.
I used those examples for a reason, you "eliminated my negative" by "proving" a positive, the stuffed birds cannot be Pileateds because they are demonstrably Ivory-bills. That's exactly what the "Believers" need to do with living Ivory-bills, isn't it?
"The Ivory-bills WERE here. But they flew somewhere else before the cameras arrived." That's a shell game.
I can't prove that the Tyrannosaurs are extinct in a philosophical sense, but I can still know it in a real world sense, can't I?
David Sibley is an honorable man and from the beginning has demonstrated a lot of good sense on this issue.
But the burden of proof is on the claimants, not the skeptics.
Because you said so?
The bar hasn't been raised by the skeptics? And there are no ad hominems aimed at the claimnants?
That's a pretty perjorative set of quotes you put around "Believers," incidentally...
I posted a few months ago about a Peregrine Falcon that three witnesses saw in my parents' suburban back yard. Nobody seems to doubt that one...
I also find it interesting you picked a T. Rex as an example, rather than, say, a coelacanth...
And in a strict philosophical sense, T. rex persists as well...
>The first results, described in today's issue of the journal Science, show that the collagen protein in T. rex bone is extraordinarily similar to that of the modern chicken, confirming current thinking that dinosaurs' nearest cousins are birds.
Sorry, I just can resist slipping back into my teacher slippers...
BTW, you're engaging in further strawman stuff with the unspoken implication we don't believe Sibley in an honorable man...
Some of us would like a few questions answered, that's all (even if the answer is an honest, "I don't know").
Now perhaps he could address them himself...
The dispute weakens the overall community in many ways whatever side you’re on, and impacts the conservation of the Ivory-billed.
Many of us feel, and certainly CT has mentioned it several times, that the subject species in the AR video should be determinable by independent study. These species are quite different.
Here is a preliminary proposal that is appropriately novel for the situation. I have always contemplated smoking guns that might be simple to measure yet diagnostic. This led to immediate wing beat Hz consideration which has been used for decades to accurately group conspecifics or distinguish between congenerics flying, sometimes at great distances from the observer. For example Snowy Egrets vs American, Sharp-shinned vs Copper's Hawks, A. Crow vs Fish, etc.
Another simple but unexplored data set of the AR bird is the distance traveled in the ~ 4 s and derivatives such as speed. Although I have never mentioned such a nuanced "concept" until now, the AR bird always seemed to subjectively cover relatively more ground than a PIWO is physically capable of in 4 sec.
If a PIWO, it can travel a certain maximum distance and reach a maximum speed in the 4 s. I hypothesize if its an IBWO, the distance that bird traveled would exceed the maximum distance a PIWO can travel in 4 s and top observable PIWO speeds would be exceeded.
There would be an adjustment for acceleration acceptable to each camp. The PIWOs distance and speed
will be determined by all parties searching and finding the fastest PIWO in existing videos. New videos might also be accepted. The skeptics/study can use the fastest PIWO that can be found in the thousands of tapes.
The distance traveled by the AR bird must be measured in the exact DeView position by a neutral, capable, independent and willing surveyor(s) or equivalent. A conservation group has some funds towards the project assuming that an individual(s) like Mr. Sibley, from the skeptical camp will also contribute, discuss and agree to the project parameters, map the flight path in relation to trees, assist in compiling the PIWO control data set, distribution of final results, etc.
Thanks, Fred Virrazzi
Incidentally, I agree with Sibley et al. that the Luneau bird is likely seen with wings largely open in the "perched" frames in which pale color is clearly visible. Both sides in the debate have badly misinterpreted some data in my opinion. Independent assessment is needed.
Links to this post: