[mou] Records Committees/science

[P Hertzel]

Richard's Wood asked "So where is the science in record 
keeping?".  It is as much a mistake to equate the records committee 
process with a secretarial task as it is to equate it with a judicial 
task. The best description is that it is a peer review process 
familiar to anyone who has tried to publish scientific data. The 
"science" is done by the field birder (hence the phrase "citizen 
scientist"), who writes his/her finding in a documentation. A records 
committee then acts as a peer-review panel, and as an editor. It may 
be a terrible process, but it's the only we have, and it does a 
pretty job of enabling careful, science-minded citizens to contribute 
to our ever-changing understanding of bird distributions.

Paul Hertzel
Mason City, IA

At 11:49 AM 7/23/2007, Richard Wood wrote:

>We also have to remember that not everyone on a records' committee 
>IS a scientist.  Anyone could be on the MOURC, for example.  All you 
>need is to be a birder and to be elected by your fellow birders.
>
>Also, real scientists just don't blindly and for no reason through 
>out data that doesn't fit their hypotheses; that would be called misconduct.
>
>Richard
>
>Richard L. Wood, Ph. D.