Questions
- What evidence would convince you that the Ivory-billed Woodpecker is not extinct?
- Feathers with blood or some sort of DNA on it
- A clear video
- Bird calls
- See it with my own eyes
2. Evaluate the merit of the video as scientific evidence.
In my opinion the video was not good solid evidence to prove that was an ivory-billed woodpecker. The video was very blurry and the only thing that could I could see that was related to a ivory-billed woodpecker was the white wing patterns as it was flapping the wings.
Questions
- What is the major conflict between Brad and Mary in terms of the scientific process?
- It is hard to get high quality videos in the field - I am not convinced by your "sound" evidence Brad
- I have 17,000 hours of sound recording including "kent calls" - Blue jays and nuthatches can make "kent" calls
- If we wait too long we might miss our chance of protecting - If you're not right, millions of dollars will be spent on a bird that
the last surviving Ivory-Bills no longer exists
2. What do you think about Brad's concern that by waiting with the announcement they could miss their chance to save the birds?
I think that if i was in Brad's shoes and believed that the bird was still alive I would want to announce it right away because waiting, could possibly mean missing our chance to save the birds but seeing the video I am not convinced that the bird that was seen in the video was an Ivory-Billed Woodpecker.
3. Imagine you are the owner of a company that owns the logging rights adjacent to the area of the woodpecker sightings, or a biologist trying to protect the habitat of another endangered species in another part of the state. Do you think that they would be satisfied with the same amount of evidence in this case as Brad? Why or why not?
No, I believe that that is not enough good evidence to stop cutting down trees. You can not clearly see that the bird is an Ivory-Billed Woodpecker therefore I think they would not do anything until they seen solid evidence.
4. What is the right amount of evidence? How can you determine the answer to this question?
I think the right amount of evidence is a clear video of an Ivory-billed Woodpecker or DNA traced to the bird. To determine that answer to this question you would need to do the same this as in the video until it is clear to see that they have found the bird.
5. Give other examples of public discourse, policy decisions, or controversial issues where your insights from this case could be applied.
The "discovery" of mermaids or Big Foot.
6. Decide how much evidence you would need to accept the claim that the Ivory-billed Woodpecker is not extinct.
I would need a clear video of the bird.
7. Decide how much evidence you would need to accept the claim that the Ivory-billed Woodpecker is extinct.
Not a lot because so far the evidence that nobody has thought to seen the bird until now since 1944 is good evidence and the video is not solid evidence so I take it as nobody has seen it until 1944.
8. Put yourself in Brad's position- what would you have told the reporter?
I would of told the reporter that some exciting news would be revealed but not at this moment.
9. Does it matter to you who presents the evidence?
Yes, it does matter to me because scientist wouldn't randomly say they have seen the bird if they haven't. I would trust that a scientist knows the exact features the bird has and for them to see it and announce it, I would believe rather than a random person.
10. Who presented the evidence in the real Ivory-billed Woodpecker case (who was present at the press conference)?
Brad Murkey.