John Young’s photo of a night parrot in western Queensland in 2013 has come under scrutiny for the methods employed to capture it.

I am rather confused, the above photo was taken by John Young, so and if he didn’t take it, where did he get it?

Don’t know the background, or the ins and outs of this night parrot scenario, but wonder if he is not being treated unfairly. I do know the powers to be in the bird world can be very nasty and demand you supply the impossible to confirm your sightings. I started off as a birdo many years ago but quickly ran into the closed world of bird experts and realising the difficulties of providing the proof they required, my future in this field would be very limited, so I therefore changed to botany, where specimens are routinely collected with each interesting discovery and hence easily verified.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-22/report-confirms-dubious-night-parrot-research/10925900?

PermeateFree said:

John Young’s photo of a night parrot in western Queensland in 2013 has come under scrutiny for the methods employed to capture it.

I am rather confused, the above photo was taken by John Young, so and if he didn’t take it, where did he get it?

Don’t know the background, or the ins and outs of this night parrot scenario, but wonder if he is not being treated unfairly. I do know the powers to be in the bird world can be very nasty and demand you supply the impossible to confirm your sightings. I started off as a birdo many years ago but quickly ran into the closed world of bird experts and realising the difficulties of providing the proof they required, my future in this field would be very limited, so I therefore changed to botany, where specimens are routinely collected with each interesting discovery and hence easily verified.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-22/report-confirms-dubious-night-parrot-research/10925900?

All the details are in the article. He really did photograph the night parrot which was a remarkable achievement. He falsified other findings, including the location of the bird, and it caused the Wildlife Conservancy to make misrepresentations to donors and also to waste money buying land. His motives are obscure.

dv said:

PermeateFree said:

John Young’s photo of a night parrot in western Queensland in 2013 has come under scrutiny for the methods employed to capture it.

I am rather confused, the above photo was taken by John Young, so and if he didn’t take it, where did he get it?

Don’t know the background, or the ins and outs of this night parrot scenario, but wonder if he is not being treated unfairly. I do know the powers to be in the bird world can be very nasty and demand you supply the impossible to confirm your sightings. I started off as a birdo many years ago but quickly ran into the closed world of bird experts and realising the difficulties of providing the proof they required, my future in this field would be very limited, so I therefore changed to botany, where specimens are routinely collected with each interesting discovery and hence easily verified.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-22/report-confirms-dubious-night-parrot-research/10925900?

All the details are in the article. He really did photograph the night parrot which was a remarkable achievement. He falsified other findings, including the location of the bird, and it caused the Wildlife Conservancy to make misrepresentations to donors and also to waste money buying land. His motives are obscure.

Apart from providing a different feather than that in the finch nest, what else did he do wrong? The eggs were only suspected of being artificial.

a bit more on the feather and eggs

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-10-12/night-parrot-australian-wildlife-conservancy-evidence-in-doubt/10364842

ChrispenEvan said:

a bit more on the feather and eggs

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-10-12/night-parrot-australian-wildlife-conservancy-evidence-in-doubt/10364842

From the above link.

>>Dr Olsen said the nest in the photo was missing many of the hallmarks seen in other night parrot nests, and the eggs in the picture looked as if they could be made of plaster.

“Blind Freddy can see that they’re fake eggs,” she said.<<

Blind Freddy obviously has much better eyes than me. How do you determine that they are fake?

PermeateFree said:

Apart from providing a different feather than that in the finch nest, what else did he do wrong? The eggs were only suspected of being artificial.

Seems like he has lied and made up a couple things, causing great embarrassment to people that had relied on his findings being genuine.

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

Apart from providing a different feather than that in the finch nest, what else did he do wrong? The eggs were only suspected of being artificial.

Seems like he has lied and made up a couple things, causing great embarrassment to people that had relied on his findings being genuine.

It seems to me that there is little or no actual proof, but a lot of adverse opinion dressed up to make it seem like the truth.

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

Apart from providing a different feather than that in the finch nest, what else did he do wrong? The eggs were only suspected of being artificial.

Seems like he has lied and made up a couple things, causing great embarrassment to people that had relied on his findings being genuine.

It seems to me that there is little or no actual proof, but a lot of adverse opinion dressed up to make it seem like the truth.

I have not been following the story, apart from what I just read today. It seems there is little or no actual proof of night parrots either.

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

Seems like he has lied and made up a couple things, causing great embarrassment to people that had relied on his findings being genuine.

It seems to me that there is little or no actual proof, but a lot of adverse opinion dressed up to make it seem like the truth.

I have not been following the story, apart from what I just read today. It seems there is little or no actual proof of night parrots either.

Except for the photo, which you would think, would be good evidence.

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

It seems to me that there is little or no actual proof, but a lot of adverse opinion dressed up to make it seem like the truth.

I have not been following the story, apart from what I just read today. It seems there is little or no actual proof of night parrots either.

Except for the photo, which you would think, would be good evidence.

“Mr Young’s initial discovery of the night parrot was genuine, made international headlines, and transformed him into a minor celebrity.”

So his initial work is regarded as good it is the subsequent work which is doubtful.

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

Seems like he has lied and made up a couple things, causing great embarrassment to people that had relied on his findings being genuine.

It seems to me that there is little or no actual proof, but a lot of adverse opinion dressed up to make it seem like the truth.

I have not been following the story, apart from what I just read today. It seems there is little or no actual proof of night parrots either.

That’s not correct. The video and photographs of the birds are not being disputed.

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

It seems to me that there is little or no actual proof, but a lot of adverse opinion dressed up to make it seem like the truth.

I have not been following the story, apart from what I just read today. It seems there is little or no actual proof of night parrots either.

Except for the photo, which you would think, would be good evidence.

Yes, but it seems his other finds are spread over a much wider area than that specific spot, from QLD to SA.

ChrispenEvan said:

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

I have not been following the story, apart from what I just read today. It seems there is little or no actual proof of night parrots either.

Except for the photo, which you would think, would be good evidence.

“Mr Young’s initial discovery of the night parrot was genuine, made international headlines, and transformed him into a minor celebrity.”

So his initial work is regarded as good it is the subsequent work which is doubtful.

Where does it say his initial discovery is accepted as being genuine? They were saying that it now probably did not exist in Qld.

PermeateFree said:

ChrispenEvan said:

PermeateFree said:

Except for the photo, which you would think, would be good evidence.

“Mr Young’s initial discovery of the night parrot was genuine, made international headlines, and transformed him into a minor celebrity.”

So his initial work is regarded as good it is the subsequent work which is doubtful.

Where does it say his initial discovery is accepted as being genuine? They were saying that it now probably did not exist in Qld.

“Mr Young’s initial discovery of the night parrot was genuine…”

dv said:

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

It seems to me that there is little or no actual proof, but a lot of adverse opinion dressed up to make it seem like the truth.

I have not been following the story, apart from what I just read today. It seems there is little or no actual proof of night parrots either.

That’s not correct. The video and photographs of the birds are not being disputed.

Have i missed that bit? Where did it say that?

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

I have not been following the story, apart from what I just read today. It seems there is little or no actual proof of night parrots either.

Except for the photo, which you would think, would be good evidence.

Yes, but it seems his other finds are spread over a much wider area than that specific spot, from QLD to SA.

So, why does that make it unlikely? From my experience, once you find the habitat where the species occurs, it makes it much easier to locate the habitat again and possibly the species too. Have done it many times.

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

Except for the photo, which you would think, would be good evidence.

Yes, but it seems his other finds are spread over a much wider area than that specific spot, from QLD to SA.

So, why does that make it unlikely? From my experience, once you find the habitat where the species occurs, it makes it much easier to locate the habitat again and possibly the species too. Have done it many times.

with night parrots?

ChrispenEvan said:

PermeateFree said:

ChrispenEvan said:

“Mr Young’s initial discovery of the night parrot was genuine, made international headlines, and transformed him into a minor celebrity.”

So his initial work is regarded as good it is the subsequent work which is doubtful.

Where does it say his initial discovery is accepted as being genuine? They were saying that it now probably did not exist in Qld.

“Mr Young’s initial discovery of the night parrot was genuine…”

Ok, found it. Yet if he did find the bird in Qld that was thought to be extinct, why should his later claims be disputed?

Anyway, it seems to me like his initial fame and celebrity status have dimmed since the original video in 2013, and he is seeking to recapture that euphoria and become relevant again.

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

Yes, but it seems his other finds are spread over a much wider area than that specific spot, from QLD to SA.

So, why does that make it unlikely? From my experience, once you find the habitat where the species occurs, it makes it much easier to locate the habitat again and possibly the species too. Have done it many times.

with night parrots?

No with plants, new and rare species.

party_pants said:

Anyway, it seems to me like his initial fame and celebrity status have dimmed since the original video in 2013, and he is seeking to recapture that euphoria and become relevant again.

Maybe but proof of that is very thin. You are dealing with some very large egos with many experts, who might not appreciate his work and if it contradicts their own. This snipping is very common in natural history cycles for some reason, when egos are easily dented. Not saying that is the case here, but you are going on the experts opinion to a very large degree here.

party_pants said:

Anyway, it seems to me like his initial fame and celebrity status have dimmed since the original video in 2013, and he is seeking to recapture that euphoria and become relevant again.

Humans are weird

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

Anyway, it seems to me like his initial fame and celebrity status have dimmed since the original video in 2013, and he is seeking to recapture that euphoria and become relevant again.

Maybe but proof of that is very thin. You are dealing with some very large egos with many experts, who might not appreciate his work and if it contradicts their own. This snipping is very common in natural history cycles for some reason, when egos are easily dented. Not saying that is the case here, but you are going on the experts opinion to a very large degree here.

the ego and humans foibles of all participants should be taken into account

dv said:

party_pants said:

Anyway, it seems to me like his initial fame and celebrity status have dimmed since the original video in 2013, and he is seeking to recapture that euphoria and become relevant again.

Humans are weird

not really, they are just human :)

It’s not unusual for people who find rare orchids to be evasive about the location to protect the plant. Are bird sightings also treated this way?

Also, the article says the conservation people are unhappy they spent money on land, but this piece says they are doing recording work there. So why was it wasted?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-10/night-parrot-chase/10612496

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

So, why does that make it unlikely? From my experience, once you find the habitat where the species occurs, it makes it much easier to locate the habitat again and possibly the species too. Have done it many times.

with night parrots?

No with plants, new and rare species.

But trees cannot fly without the assistance of explosive situations.

PermeateFree said:

John Young’s photo of a night parrot in western Queensland in 2013 has come under scrutiny for the methods employed to capture it.

I am rather confused, the above photo was taken by John Young, so and if he didn’t take it, where did he get it?

Don’t know the background, or the ins and outs of this night parrot scenario, but wonder if he is not being treated unfairly. I do know the powers to be in the bird world can be very nasty and demand you supply the impossible to confirm your sightings. I started off as a birdo many years ago but quickly ran into the closed world of bird experts and realising the difficulties of providing the proof they required, my future in this field would be very limited, so I therefore changed to botany, where specimens are routinely collected with each interesting discovery and hence easily verified.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-22/report-confirms-dubious-night-parrot-research/10925900?

This is what I find dubious. The distribution map and the endangerment status of the night parrot in “The Australian Bird Guide”.

The distribution map shows a range for the Night Parrot in Australia that is larger than that of both the House Sparrow and the Rainbow Lorikeet. The endangerment status EN seems too lax, I would have put it at CR. And there’s a heck of a lot of writing for a bird that’s been seen, according to the dubious text, only in one location alive since 2006.

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

with night parrots?

No with plants, new and rare species.

But trees cannot fly without the assistance of explosive situations.

If the birds have a preference to a specific habitat, it will move from one habitat to another similar habitat.

buffy said:

It’s not unusual for people who find rare orchids to be evasive about the location to protect the plant. Are bird sightings also treated this way?

Also, the article says the conservation people are unhappy they spent money on land, but this piece says they are doing recording work there. So why was it wasted?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-10/night-parrot-chase/10612496

Yes a lot of loose ends.

PermeateFree said:

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

No with plants, new and rare species.

But trees cannot fly without the assistance of explosive situations.

If the birds have a preference to a specific habitat, it will move from one habitat to another similar habitat.

assuming that they have a viable breeding population and exist in large enough numbers to warrant expansion into adjacent territories.

if they exist only in a small number of isolated pockets they will not necessarily be found throughout the entire potential habitat area.

also, we don’t know enough about their behaviour – whether they are egregious or territorial, whether they are migratory or wanderers, or settle within a certain home range.

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

roughbarked said:

But trees cannot fly without the assistance of explosive situations.

If the birds have a preference to a specific habitat, it will move from one habitat to another similar habitat.

assuming that they have a viable breeding population and exist in large enough numbers to warrant expansion into adjacent territories.

if they exist only in a small number of isolated pockets they will not necessarily be found throughout the entire potential habitat area.

also, we don’t know enough about their behaviour – whether they are egregious or territorial, whether they are migratory or wanderers, or settle within a certain home range.

John Young should have a good idea as he discovered the birds there in the first place. They are also known from WA, but there is nothing to compare with on site experience to spot the subtle habitat differences, which I doubt if those criticising experts would have. It is obviously a cryptic species living in remote areas.

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

If the birds have a preference to a specific habitat, it will move from one habitat to another similar habitat.

assuming that they have a viable breeding population and exist in large enough numbers to warrant expansion into adjacent territories.

if they exist only in a small number of isolated pockets they will not necessarily be found throughout the entire potential habitat area.

also, we don’t know enough about their behaviour – whether they are egregious or territorial, whether they are migratory or wanderers, or settle within a certain home range.

John Young should have a good idea as he discovered the birds there in the first place. They are also known from WA, but there is nothing to compare with on site experience to spot the subtle habitat differences, which I doubt if those criticising experts would have. It is obviously a cryptic species living in remote areas.

Bit of a romantic Hollywood way of looking things: the lone wolf versus the establishment experts. Sometime experts do know a bit about what they are talking about and just as skilled and experienced as anyone else.

They are wondering why they are not getting the same results by doing the same thing, so they look at the results and find they are in fact inconclusive upon closer inspection. This is how science is supposed to work. Either he has been making things up, or he has been latching onto anything ambiguous and attributing it to the night parrot by default without having any further work to confirm it.

party_pants said:

PermeateFree said:

party_pants said:

assuming that they have a viable breeding population and exist in large enough numbers to warrant expansion into adjacent territories.

if they exist only in a small number of isolated pockets they will not necessarily be found throughout the entire potential habitat area.

also, we don’t know enough about their behaviour – whether they are egregious or territorial, whether they are migratory or wanderers, or settle within a certain home range.

John Young should have a good idea as he discovered the birds there in the first place. They are also known from WA, but there is nothing to compare with on site experience to spot the subtle habitat differences, which I doubt if those criticising experts would have. It is obviously a cryptic species living in remote areas.

Bit of a romantic Hollywood way of looking things: the lone wolf versus the establishment experts. Sometime experts do know a bit about what they are talking about and just as skilled and experienced as anyone else.

They are wondering why they are not getting the same results by doing the same thing, so they look at the results and find they are in fact inconclusive upon closer inspection. This is how science is supposed to work. Either he has been making things up, or he has been latching onto anything ambiguous and attributing it to the night parrot by default without having any further work to confirm it.

Perhaps we should go back to the good old days and shoot a few birds. As an example, I discovered a new Lobelia species several years ago and I am still the ONLY person to have ever seen it in the wild. Now I could look in the habitat type it prefers and extend its distribution (as I have done), but someone just out looking for it by casual observation would be most unlikely to ever come across it.

PermeateFree said:

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

No with plants, new and rare species.

But trees cannot fly without the assistance of explosive situations.

If the birds have a preference to a specific habitat, it will move from one habitat to another similar habitat.

yes.

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

roughbarked said:

But trees cannot fly without the assistance of explosive situations.

If the birds have a preference to a specific habitat, it will move from one habitat to another similar habitat.

yes.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-10/night-parrot-chase/10612496

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

If the birds have a preference to a specific habitat, it will move from one habitat to another similar habitat.

yes.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-10/night-parrot-chase/10612496

https://youtu.be/JD7va4BlUe0?t=268

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

roughbarked said:

But trees cannot fly without the assistance of explosive situations.

If the birds have a preference to a specific habitat, it will move from one habitat to another similar habitat.

yes.

No. If that was true, Western Australia would already be full of rainbow lorikeets and house sparrows.

mollwollfumble said:

roughbarked said:

PermeateFree said:

If the birds have a preference to a specific habitat, it will move from one habitat to another similar habitat.

yes.

No. If that was true, Western Australia would already be full of rainbow lorikeets and house sparrows.

Incorrect.
Certain parts of WA already have rainbow lorikeets but they can’t go everywherer.

roughbarked said:

mollwollfumble said:

roughbarked said:

yes.

No. If that was true, Western Australia would already be full of rainbow lorikeets and house sparrows.

Incorrect.
Certain parts of WA already have rainbow lorikeets but they can’t go everywherer.

In fact it has been three decades for rainbow lorikeets to spread the 12 km to where I am since I first spotted them locally.

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

mollwollfumble said:

No. If that was true, Western Australia would already be full of rainbow lorikeets and house sparrows.

Incorrect.
Certain parts of WA already have rainbow lorikeets but they can’t go everywherer.

In fact it has been three decades for rainbow lorikeets to spread the 12 km to where I am since I first spotted them locally.

However, within three kilometres from where I first spotted a small flock, they now deafen one in the main street of town on sunset.

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

Incorrect.
Certain parts of WA already have rainbow lorikeets but they can’t go everywherer.

In fact it has been three decades for rainbow lorikeets to spread the 12 km to where I am since I first spotted them locally.

However, within three kilometres from where I first spotted a small flock, they now deafen one in the main street of town on sunset.

These however are one bird that cannot go far from water good enough to make trees fruit.