—————————————————————————
For the last 2 years I’ve wanted to update/streamline the cluttered left-hand column of the blog, but with interest lagging in this whole topic lacked the energy to do so. Interest has perked up slightly since the USFWS announcement so finally found the time this weekend to eliminate a lot of links (especially dead ones). If any of the ones I’ve scratched prove particularly useful in months to come I’ll reinstate. Especially sorry to remove the IBWO Researchers Forum which seems to now be defunct (if someone knows otherwise let me know; they have suffered long downtimes previously, but this one seems permanent?).
I have added the British BirdForum.net site, since if there is any significant IBWO news to come it will likely be well-covered and debated at that forum, which probably had the most significant, wide-ranging (not always pleasant) debate of any site, early-on, over the evidence Cornell originally brought to light (indeed, if I remember correctly, it was some of the vitriol at that site that led to IBWO Researchers Forum being formed!).
I've also added one two of the Ivory-bill Facebook sites which tend to be somewhat active (though, like many, I despise Facebook!... but one can't avoid it these days, and it is effective at spreading ideas/news, even if much of it needs to be taken with a grain of salt).
—————————————————————————
5 comments:
I was truly surprised by the lack of professionalism on British Bird Forum, in many ways, within the past year. People overstepped their knowledge sets, told instead of asked, were rude, and dismissive.
And, curiously, I think Facebook is a game-changer. The nature of scientific publication and communication has changed and will continue to change. If I am an active searcher or consultant, know my stuff, have connections and help make things happen, why should I feel the need to get into The Auk for example? Peer review is not what it was; the level of talented amateur has risen.
Hi John, well the BirdForum has a LOT of very experienced, knowledgeable birders and scientific-thinking observers, as can be seen in any number of other threads they do.… BUT yes, the IBWO topic is soooo controversial it brings out a lot of vitriol (almost anywhere it is discussed, unless highly moderated), so on that topic the site requires a thick skin and willingness to read through the chaff to get to the nuggets! Indeed, a lot of the best critics have abandoned the IBWO debate entirely because they find it so repetitively tiresome, time-wasting, even laughable (from their standpoint).… but new, truly significant evidence would likely bring them back to the discussion. BirdForum can then offer a good mix of varying opinion and analysis. Places like Facebook and Reddit have a whole host of other problems, but they all can contribute something, and I’m certainly happy to see the topic get attention anywhere.
Yes, and thanks for keeping this website alive as well.
Yep: "a lot of the best critics have abandoned the IBWO debate entirely because they find it so repetitively tiresome, time-wasting, even laughable (from their standpoint"
Post a Comment