What the papers say...

Some recent comments on the Ivorybill paper:

In the comments section here:
'What a waste of papers (and electrons). What downgrades Collinson's work is his lack of credentials for the work he did for this paper- e.g., he is an amateur doing an amateur analysis. His expertise appears to be cell development. Because he knows how to write a paper in journal style, he was able to get this amateur analysis published in an online-only journal.'

From Fishcrow:
'J. Martin Collinson says, "My guess is that we've missed the boat on the ivory-billed woodpecker and they're already gone." This pronouncement comes from someone who has probably never spent time in ivorybill habitat. In an article posted at Birder's World, he contradicts himself with the statement, "There appears to be no reason to question the anecdotal sight records of Ivory-billed Woodpecker presented in Fitzpatrick et al (or in many online sources), because some of them appear credible..." Collinson's article is the shoddiest piece of work I have seen on the ivorybill.'

There are also extensive critiques by David Martin and Bill Pulliam in the comments linked to the paper.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


On a different note, I think it's really worth listening to the audio file of a searcher's story presented here. To my mind... speaking as someone who has never spent time in ivorybill habitat... there are some very telling statements in there. See if you can pick them out.