[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TAS BirdBoard ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by jnrosenthal on 21:23:36 01/25/07
In Reply to: Re: Stay tuned here for IBWO issues posted by Georgiana
Sure there's lots of territory that's no fun to search in--but that begs the question--they're claiming to be seeing and hearing the birds-they just can't seem to produce a picture..
And if you think for a second that these searchers will fail to poke their noses in a nest or roost hole to find broken eggs, feathers, or to photograph hatchlings, then you must assume that they won't do the job any scientist ought to do-e.g. identify, document and study these birds.(Look at Tanner's pictures and videos of what he did in the Singer Tract 70 years ago with less money, fewer resources and infinitely inferior technology)As for the 70's photos you can read about them on Tom Nelson's blog--evidently most scientists considered them stuffed posed fakes--even Tanner was alive then, and I don't recall reading that he was particularly impressed or persuaded. Finally, as for being judgmental of scientists-it seems to me that scientists who advance any proposition should be held to the same standard of scrutiny and proof as anyone who makes a public pronouncement --whether it be the existence of WMDs in a particular country, or the existence of a bird generally thought to be extinct since 1946.Read the account of how Tyler Hicks supposedly saw an IBWO on Christmas eve at 40 feet--was able to see all the field marks, including the ivory bill-but managed to not get a photograph with the digital SLR he was holding because, as his boss Geoff Hill writes"the camera failed him".And Tyler Hicks is an experienced birder who leads paid birding trips and is now out in the swamps doing just one thing-- trying to take a picture of the bird!Sorry, but I am not persuaded. When I was younger I wanted to believe in Tinker Belle just as now I'd like to believe the IBWO exists. Unlike as with Tinker Belle, I am afraid wishing won't make the IBWO real, nor will abandoning years of experience that tells me that eyewitness identifcations are among the worst form of proof.I have utmost respect for scientists who apply the scientific method to their work, and I suspect the general public does too.And I don't think any responsible birder will suspend disbelief simply because they'd like to think this bird still lives. If I had a bumper sticker it would track the wisdom of my history professors 40 years ago in college: "Question Authority". So far, as far as I am concerned, the "authorities"(read "scientists") who make claims for the existence of the bird haven't supplied the necessary proof to support their eyewitness accounts and other indirect claims(ie kent calls and double knocks)--and they acknowledge it-which is why they're out in the swamps right now trying to provide photos instead of excuses... That said, I sincerely hope, however, that my skepticism will someday be rewarded with pictorial evidence of a living IBWO--and I imagine every person with an interest in birds or natural history shares my view.
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TAS BirdBoard ] [ FAQ ]