[mou] Records Committees/science

PM Subject: Re: [mou] Records Committees/science In respectful response to Jim's note that Science is cold, objective, and unfeeling. It deals with truth and the pursuit thereof, I would like to remind folks that while such a statement is true insofar as it goes, science goes nowhere without

[mou] Records Committees/science

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

[mou] Records Committees

, 2007 5:31 PM Subject: Re: [mou] Records Committees Hi all, I, for one, question Al's thoughts on focusing on on my ID documentation skills, not the perception that there is a pecking order or high priesthood. Several of you have mentioned getting phone calls or emails from someone

[mou] Records Committees

Somehow, the thread on ID documentation skills became a thread on records committees - perhaps a natural progression. However, I wish to be personally clear. I support the work of records committees - and while I suffer the same frustration that many do when documentation is rejected -

[mou] Records committees et al.

Hey birders, I also think it is important to distinguish between a rejected documentation and an inaccurate identification. Those two are not necessarily synonymous. It is possible to accurately identify a bird in the field but not include important fieldmarks in the documentation sent to