Friday, April 27, 2007

Note for those who have Ivory-bill questions...

If you have questions about my IBWO postings, and you express them via comments on Tom Nelson's blog, I will not be able to respond to them there. He does not allow me to post comments on his blog, even when the discussion is about me and my writings. If you have an honest question of general interest, I'll respond to it even if you submit it here anonymously. If you just wanna call me a pseudoscientific poopyhead, Nelson's blog is the right venue for you.

P.S. I thought to qualify as a "_crow" I had to claim an actual Ivorybill sighting of my own?


At 8:09 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do not worry about Tom Nelson Bill. I am sure Tom and his partner Jim are planning another go of another remarkable big day in Minnesota. I am sure this year Tom and Jim will get about 200 species for thier efforts and there will be not one Minnesotan birder who will believe their totals. Minnesotan birders do not take Tom serious and neither should you.

At 7:27 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am a professional (as in paid to do research on) birds and am a friend of Geoff Hills. I thing what you are doing to question the idiocy of the so-called "sceptic" is badly needed. A few elements of the lunatic fringe who are posing a sceptics are creating more heat than fire. I would be interested in corresponding by email but do not want to waste time with the blog game. As a scientist, my currency is peer reviewed work and with blogging you get what you pay for — opinions of everybody who has an opinion, regardless of whether they have anything to back it up. As a scientist I am a trained sceptic and based on the evidence to date, I have zero doubt that the ivorybill is around. The bird is not extinct and the blogging know-nothings are only doing harm. Contact me at my email if you wish to discuss this further.

At 9:46 PM, Blogger Bill Pulliam said...

Well since the folks over there apparently do not want to (or are afraid to) debate me in a forum where I can actually respond to what they say, I think your approach probably is best and they should just be ignored. The fact that he continues to ban me from posting to threads that are directly addressing me and my ideas BY NAME is just absurd and worthy of the best conspiracy theory rag.

Oh, by the way, Tom slipped and inavertently fingered the "IBWO Skeptic" as his brother, "buck3m." So we have the vast majority of that site written by Tom, his brother, and two anonymous cheerleaders ("Hi Fog" and "Low Fog"). Oddly, "El Carpintero" seems to have reappeared and be posting on these threads anonymously; especially odd since he quit there because of Nelson's policy of banning people like me. Now he's back writing tomes about me that I can't reply to.


At 7:57 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bill & Anonymous:

All of Tom's listing achievements should have a asterisks next to them. You ask any well known birder besides myself from Minnesota and they will also share the same thoughts that Tom's big day totals he submits each year are very VERY dubious!

Even his latest 133 species he recorded last weekend has raised many eye brows. There are many comments posted last weekend on how very few migrants were seen last weekend. Only two warblers species were seen in several counties in western Minnesota last weekend. A birder who lives in western Minnesota mentioned it took 5 days to see 150 species and 3 of those days included bird species seen during a large birding festival! BUT yet Tom & Jim Hughes were able to record 133 species in one day in Minnesota!

I am sure all of Tom's loyal supporters will make excuses for him and that is fine but the reality is and like Anonymous said "Minnesotan birders do not take Tom serious" That is 100% true and even before his "Ivory-billed Skeptic" blog was created Tom Nelson and Jim Highes listing totals were always on the radar and talked about among several birders in Minn.


At 8:32 AM, Blogger Bill Pulliam said...

Mike -- I don't think any of Tom's remaining supporters are birders, so it won't even be on their radar.

At 9:17 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

But does "Amy Lester" take Tom serious?

At 9:32 AM, Blogger Bill Pulliam said...

To her credit, she hasn't been seen since his latest attempts to debunk the IPCC global warming report with Lord Monckton's oil-industry-financed nonsense. Perhaps she realized that Nelson is not the stalwart guardian of truth he claimed to be and disassociated herself from him.

At 7:58 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank the "Ivory-billed Septic" for the disappearance of Amy Lester AND Nelson's abandoning the Global Warming debate.

Now that it's been mentioned here, of course, I wouldn't be surprised to see Nelson revive both of them.

Have you seen this, by the way?


Post a Comment

<< Home

Site Meter