• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

So: Many experts now agree ... some birds use fire as a weapon.

What did I miss seeing them doing in the film? Is there a question that birds can fly?


Get a load of the comment and snarky reply..

"Yet no footage of a hawk actually picking up or carrying a flaming stick anywhere to be seen."

Reply:

"are said to have the ability". English comprehension used to be taught as a subject in schools.

Is that you smartcooky? :D


I was thinking more along the lines of: 'The birds were just about to pick up smoldering sticks and dropping them in dry grass when they were scared by a drone.'
 
Where ever did you get that idea.?
You fail to grasp the difference between a big foot claim and a common skill exhibited by raptors that may include intentional fire advancement.


Yet the allegedly common skill of spreading fire allegedly exhibited by raptors has never been filmed. The well-documented skill of evolution, speciation, has resulted not only in several species of big apes but also in several species of homo, most of them now extinct, some of them after having contributed a chunk of DNA to the currently living humans. Nothing rules out the existence of Bigfoot, and as shown before Bigfoot has been observed, there are expert witnesses, some of them expert witnesses, and yet most of us refuse to consider those expert witness observations to be evidence of the existence of Bigfoot.

We have pointed out this parallel before, and it is not at all difficult to grasp.

•••
Soba, the Firehawk video is lovely but again .....filming a specific behaviour that may be rare or restricted to a specific raptor culture and not in others will not engender spending much money on the effort.


Some of the (alleged) expert witnesses claim to have seen it once, some twice, and some have seen it several times, sometimes repeatedly. Considering the amount of money that goes into firefighting and the number of lives lost to those fires - be the number small in comparison to tornadoes in the USA, their lives should still count - it shouldn't be an insurmountable obestacle to spend a little money on a couple of videographers and the training needed to make sure they don't get in the way of firefighting.
By the way, I have already told you how those videographers could be financed:
(Man, which producer of reality series wouldn't dream of financing that expedition to replace those boring shows showing immigration control opening suitcases in their never-ending search for illegal Chinese noodles!)



According to the paper indigenes take it for granted as a given behaviour they are aware of.

According to the paper, an awful lot of ossies don't believe that mythology is anything but mythology. They also seem to think that witness reports supporting notions based on mythology may not actually be true. They seem to know about the unreliability of eyewitness testimony. In fact, skeptics are mentioned several times in the paper.

They and helicopter rangers set bush fires all the time.

Yes, and we believe it, but it's not exactly an exotic claim. Here is video evidence that people can not only spread but even make fire:
I've seen the latter and it's a cool job firing little incendiary bombs from the copter.
They had a great display at Kakadu National Park ... it was a about the size of a softball and the rangers just tossed them out the door where they wanted the burn. We saw dozens of fires started that way.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-31/aerial-burnoffs-in-the-whitsundays/101052620


Interesting story in another context, but not really interesting in this context. Nobody ever doubted that humans can make fire, did they? I don't even think that there's a group of believers claiming that they can't.
 
.....5.6 million km2 and covering more than 70 percent of the Australian continent.


And yet bushfires along with the birds eating fleeing or partially burnt prey are filmed all the time. Macdoc has even been an eyewitness to bushfires being set:
"They and helicopter rangers set bush fires all the time.
I've seen the latter"

(ISF's collection of emojis doesn't have a laughing kangaroo.)
 
As you are agnostic but lean towards accepting the claim, what would you need to see to shift one way or another?

As long as eye-witness accounts continue to be recorded (and they have been recorded by the hundreds over a few decades), then I will continue to remain skeptical, but leaning toward acceptance. Of course, video evidence would be nice to have, although those who have dug themselves into a hole of denial will scream fake!

You see, unlike dann (and to a certain extent you) I do not summarily dismiss observers as liars and frauds, especially those who are experienced in the relevant fields (bush fires and animal behavior). Essentially, if an expert in bird behavior, or an expert in bushfires, gives a detailed description of, say, a black kite picking up a smouldering twig and dropping it in a location where there was no fire, then I have no right to call that person a liar.

However, in your case, smartcooky and macdoc, what would you need to see to accept that the birds do NOT do this?

You are asking me how I can prove a negative? Really? You ought to know better than that!

Then how do you accept there is no Bigfoot?

You still don't get the fact that there is a world of difference between claiming to observe an alleged animal, the existence of which is not supported by any scientific evidence at all, and the claimed observing of a known species of animal behaving in a way that is in complete accord with known observed, meticulously documented, filmed and scientifically studied behavior.

If you can't get your head around this fact, there isn't much I can do to help you.

Raptors are known to use twigs and small branches as tools to get food.
Raptors are known to shape twigs into hooked tools to make it easier to get food.

It is not a stretch to accept that they might use tools in other ways, such as spreading fire to get food. It is nowhere near as big a stretch to accept as is the existence of Bigfoot or UFO's from alien planets.

.
 
As long as eye-witness accounts continue to be recorded (and they have been recorded by the hundreds over a few decades), then I will continue to remain skeptical, but leaning toward acceptance. Of course, video evidence would be nice to have, although those who have dug themselves into a hole of denial will scream fake!

You see, unlike dann (and to a certain extent you) I do not summarily dismiss observers as liars and frauds, especially those who are experienced in the relevant fields (bush fires and animal behavior). Essentially, if an expert in bird behavior, or an expert in bushfires, gives a detailed description of, say, a black kite picking up a smouldering twig and dropping it in a location where there was no fire, then I have no right to call that person a liar.

This is making stuff up.

1.) Nobody is screaming "fake!" This is an unsubstantiated pre-emptive smear.
2.) Nobody is calling anyone a liar or a fraud. I specifically have argued that people can be fooled by optical illusions, to which you responded with a GIF. I have also said that people can be deceived by narratives. People testify all the time that certain alternative medicine works for them. Does it mean they are lying? No, almost certainly not.


You are asking me how I can prove a negative? Really? You ought to know better than that!

I'm not asking you to prove a negative (although it is clearly false and contradictory to say "You cannot prove a negative!" because that claim itself would therefore be unprovable by definition), but what I am asking you is what would lead you to think that the birds do NOT set fires.

Let me help you see this.

If I were getting acupuncture every time I got a cold and I used the fact that my colds went away after I had acupuncture, would you accept that I might be right? Or would you say that acupuncture does nothing for colds?

What if I turned around and said that it gets my ying and yang back in line, and this has been well-attested throughout centuries, nay, millenia of Chinese history etc... etc...

And then as my final trump card I point out

"You cannot prove a negative" therefore nothing will convince me that acupuncture did NOT work against colds.

You still don't get the fact that there is a world of difference between claiming to observe an alleged animal, the existence of which is not supported by any scientific evidence at all, and the claimed observing of a known species of animal behaving in a way that is in complete accord with known observed, meticulously documented, filmed and scientifically studied behavior.

If you can't get your head around this fact, there isn't much I can do to help you.

Raptors are known to use twigs and small branches as tools to get food.
Raptors are known to shape twigs into hooked tools to make it easier to get food.

It is not a stretch to accept that they might use tools in other ways, such as spreading fire to get food. It is nowhere near as big a stretch to accept as is the existence of Bigfoot or UFO's from alien planets.

.

You are merely making arbitrary distinctions now for why you can after all prove a negative in some cases, but not in this specific case. It seems you are doing some special pleading.

This is my problem with a lot of your arguments. They fart in the face of skepticism and claim to be the cool breeze of rationality.
 
snort ......look to your own foibles...they are numerous.
You are flailing about over a simple set of realities.

Certain raptors have been observed carrying burning twigs from an existing bush fire.
They would benefit from this starting a new fire.
It is not a stretch for their ability or intelligence to do this purposely
Indigenous communities that have lived with the raptors accept this as a "this is known"reality
.
-

There are indigenous communities which accept as “known reality” that aborigines evolved in Australia (because there is “no dreaming” of arriving by boat). I have spoken to people who profess this, but steadfastly refuse to debate.

So I do indeed take claims by indigenous people with a large grain of salt, given their willingness to take the piss when passing legends to white people.
 
We have all heard one of the favourite arguments of woos: 'I was very skeptical, but now that I've experienced it myself, seen it with my own eyes ...'

From the 'scientific' report:
Below, and in the next section, we discuss reports from six non-Aboriginal observers who, in most cases,* had previously heard of fire-spreading from Aboriginal people and, while skeptical, were eventually able to witness it themselves, sometimes in the accompaniment of Aboriginal people, on a single occasion or multiple occasions.


Sometimes and on multiple occasions, and yet: [Insert excuses for why avian fire-spreading could be observed several times and yet not filmed].
It is almost as if Aboriginal deep time tribal lore somehow precludes the use of modern technology. Almost ...

If only something like this could be mounted on fire engines:
Too bad raptors can't be expected to pay fines.


*ETA: I wonder if this is one of those, scientifically legit, 'We are not sure that this goes for everybody, so to be on the safe side we say most instead of all. I also wonder how many people who visit bushfire areas never heard the story. I can't imagine that anybody who lives there didn't.
 
Last edited:
There are indigenous communities which accept as “known reality” that aborigines evolved in Australia (because there is “no dreaming” of arriving by boat). I have spoken to people who profess this, but steadfastly refuse to debate.

Hardly surprising, since current theories are that they didn't arrive by boat :D
 
snort ......look to your own foibles...they are numerous.
You are flailing about over a simple set of realities.

Certain raptors have been observed carrying burning twigs from an existing bush fire.
They would benefit from this starting a new fire.
It is not a stretch for their ability or intelligence to do this purposely
Indigenous communities that have lived with the raptors accept this as a "this is known"reality
.
and really could care less what you think.....

I and others accept the adjudicated eye witness reports from a science paper submitted at face value while awaiting further development of the cultural development in raptor hunting techniques. -30-

Keep in mind you are debating with people for whom "Pictures or it Never Happened" is not a joke or an offhand remark... its the dogma of their Holy Scripture.
 
Keep in mind you are debating with people for whom "Pictures or it Never Happened" is not a joke or an offhand remark... its the dogma of their Holy Scripture.

LOL! Have to love these pseudoskeptical attempts at inverting the burden of proof.

You yourself admit that there is insufficient evidence for asserting that birds use fire as a tool. You have stated repeatedly that you are not convinced of the evidence.

When I have asked you, what would convince you, and held your hand as I guided you all the way to the conclusion you replied...

Of course, you are heavily hinting at getting video evidence

So you know what would convince you!

In other words, YOU are part of the "people for whom" POSTFU is "the dogma of their Holy Scripture".

Now repent your sins, my child!
 
There are indigenous communities which accept as “known reality” that aborigines evolved in Australia (because there is “no dreaming” of arriving by boat). I have spoken to people who profess this, but steadfastly refuse to debate.


This author knows that evidence and belief are not the same thing:
Footprints in the sand, artefacts in ancient shelters and items such as this piece of ochre all provide evidence of the vast human history of the continent.
However, this is just part of the story, because Aboriginal people traditionally believe they have been here in their country since the time of creation and, prior to that, the continent was a ‘land before time’.
Evidence of first peoples (National Museum Australia)

Are there any claims that Aboriginal people came up with Big Bang theory? (The theory, not the series!)

On mainland Australia, the Dreaming is a system of belief held by many first Australians to account for their origins. In the Dreaming all-powerful beings roamed the landscape and laid the moral and physical groundwork for human society.
I assume that was when birds taught people to use fire.

So I do indeed take claims by indigenous people with a large grain of salt, given their willingness to take the piss when passing legends to white people.


You wouldn't happen to have video (or maybe audio) recordings of this, would you? It doesn't have to be of anything you witnessed yourself.
It is not so much for evidence as for entertainment value. I can't imagine there aren't any good Aboriginal standup comedians, for instance.
 
Hardly surprising, since current theories are that they didn't arrive by boat :D

That wasn’t his point.

http://www.workingwithindigenousaustralians.info/content/Culture_2_The_Dreaming.html


"
The Dreaming" is the belief of many Aboriginal groups that Aboriginal people have been in Australia since the beginning.

I am not inclined to believe in impossible events, no matter how ardently they are accepted by aborigines. I am also not inclined to believe in tales of fire starting birds without decent evidence. Leg pulling is a far more likely explanation.
 
Last edited:
I am not inclined to believe in impossible events, no matter how ardently they are accepted by aborigines. I am also not inclined to believe in tales of fire starting birds without decent evidence. Leg pulling is a far more likely explanation.


In some cases, the ones you mentioned. In the vast majority of cases, the eyewitnesses probably believe that they saw what they say they saw.
Observer bias is the tendency of observers to not see what is there, but instead to see what they expect or want to see. This is a common occurrence in the everyday lives of many and is a significant problem that is sometimes encountered in scientific research and studies.
Observer bias (Wikipedia)
 
That wasn’t his point.

http://www.workingwithindigenousaustralians.info/content/Culture_2_The_Dreaming.html


"

I am not inclined to believe in impossible events, no matter how ardently they are accepted by aborigines. I am also not inclined to believe in tales of fire starting birds without decent evidence. Leg pulling is a far more likely explanation.

Right. Researchers present scientific papers like this for lolz :rolleyes:

https://bioone.org/journals/journal...ern-Australia/10.2993/0278-0771-37.4.700.full
 
I saw that earlier. Unconvincing.


Totally!
"this belief [i.e. discounting the veracity of fire-spreading birds or believing the alleged behavior to be unintentional] is bolstered by the lack of unequivocal video or photographic evidence, though this article mitigates that circumstance by presenting IEK, as well as in-depth first-hand observer reports."
 

This may have been mentioned before, but it was my main take away from the report.

It says:

We suspect that the primary barrier to this type of study ( video ) has been the inherent risk associated with working at active fire fronts.

Yet, the most reliable reports ( in-depth first-hand observer reports) were from people working at active fire fronts.
 
Last edited:
This may have been mentioned before, but it was my main take away from the report.

It says:



Yet, the most reliable reports ( in-depth first-hand observer reports) were from people working at active fire fronts.

Because a squad of fully equipped and fitted out professional and volunteer firefighters working at a fire front carries EXACTLY the same risk as a fully equipped and fitted out film crew :rolleyes:
 
One thing that occurs to me is that anyone in a position to observe - or film - a bird taking a burning branch from an active fire front is probably not in a position to observe - or film - that same bird using that branch to start a fire somewhere else.

Another thing that occurs to me is that it seems like a waste of effort for the bird. They've got a fully operational fire right here. Why wouldn't they just work this fire they've already got, instead of flying miles away to start a new fire somewhere else?
 
One thing that occurs to me is that anyone in a position to observe - or film - a bird taking a burning branch from an active fire front is probably not in a position to observe - or film - that same bird using that branch to start a fire somewhere else.

Another thing that occurs to me is that it seems like a waste of effort for the bird. They've got a fully operational fire right here. Why wouldn't they just work this fire they've already got, instead of flying miles away to start a new fire somewhere else?

You think the prey fleeing a patch of fire is an infinite resource for them?
 
I kind of think they do.


I don't think it's for the lolz, but it is funny:
Though Aboriginal rangers and others who deal with bushfires take into account the risks posed by raptors that cause controlled burns to jump across firebreaks, official skepticism about the reality of avian fire-spreading hampers effective planning for landscape management and restoration.
(...)
However, a small, independent body of ethnobiological literature produced by collaborative ventures of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal researchers (...) also includes IEK [Indigenous Ecological Knowledge] of fire-spreading, encapsulating numerous direct observations from distinct parts of NT interwoven with religious beliefs. The literature, little-known outside Australia and not cited by recent skeptics, bears closer examination and is quite credible.
 
I don't think it's for the lolz, but it is funny:

For me the funniest part was the disclaimer about them not being able to use any of the aboriginal claims because it would be racist to report them outside the context of aboriginal religious practices, and without a token aboriginal on the author list.
 
One thing that occurs to me is that anyone in a position to observe - or film - a bird taking a burning branch from an active fire front is probably not in a position to observe - or film - that same bird using that branch to start a fire somewhere else.

Another thing that occurs to me is that it seems like a waste of effort for the bird. They've got a fully operational fire right here. Why wouldn't they just work this fire they've already got, instead of flying miles away to start a new fire somewhere else?

The claim I have heard is that fires that have already attracted lots of birds mean that competition is strong to catch the fleeing insects etc… however if one of them starts a new fire somewhere they have their own private barbecue. Well, until other birds promptly show up. 🤷*♂️
 
The claim I have heard is that fires that have already attracted lots of birds mean that competition is strong to catch the fleeing insects etc… however if one of them starts a new fire somewhere they have their own private barbecue. Well, until other birds promptly show up.

That seems like a reasonable hypothesis to me.
 
The claim I have heard is that fires that have already attracted lots of birds mean that competition is strong to catch the fleeing insects etc… however if one of them starts a new fire somewhere they have their own private barbecue. Well, until other birds promptly show up. 🤷*♂️

Haven't other birds learned to follow the birds with smoking twigs?
 
You think the prey fleeing a patch of fire is an infinite resource for them?

Well I certainly do.

Fires don't just sit in one place.

They move quite quickly and flush a lot of INSECTS which the birds catch on the wing.

This behaviour has been noted and filmed countless times.

The same professional film crews have been unable to film birds carrying burning sticks.

Even the TRAINED BIRD for the ABC documentary, was not willing to carry a burning stick. (The bird that was filmed on the handler's arm, and shown to be retrieving thrown sticks)

By the way, earlier commentary seems to be confusing the behaviour of corvids with raptors.
 
They move quite quickly and flush a lot of INSECTS which the birds catch on the wing/hilite.


Not just insects and not just on the wing (in footage and photos, the birds can be seen on the ground near bushfires). From the often-referred-to article:
Tropical savannas on fire attract fire-foraging birds that prey on vertebrates and invertebrates fleeing flames and smoke, as well as on the remains of animals killed by fires (Sick 1968; Thiollay 1971)
Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia (BioOne, Dec 1, 2017)
This behavior is not contested.

By the way, earlier commentary seems to be confusing the behaviour of corvids with raptors.


Another confusion in the thread in addition to one species of birds being confused with another has been the confusion of anthropologists with experts in animal behavior.
 
I think I may have posted this years ago, but it is still interesting since nothing has really changed - except the years gone by without video evidence despite expeditions to obtain it:

Anecdotal evidence suggests that certain birds of prey use fire to their advantage—but the research hasn’t been caught on camera yet.
(...)
He [Penn State geographer Dr. Mark Bonta] plans to travel to Australia soon to assist Gosford [an Australian lawyer who represents the interests of aboriginal people in Australia’s Northern Territory] with the field study research, and hopes that they’ll gather photographic evidence of the behavior during this year’s Northern Australian fire season, which (due to El Nino) is predicted to be long and severe.
Until physical proof can be gathered and submitted to a biology or ecology journal, the research remains an “ethno-ornithological study involving peer review of ethnographic evidence only,” he says.
Not that the ethnographic component doesn’t interest Bonta—he has already developed a pseudo-hypothesis that supposes birds have long controlled fire and early humans may have been inspired to do the same after witnessing this trait. “There’s some background in this within anthropology showing that humans interact with other species and learn from them,” he says. That is, if they’re able to prove that birds control fire in the first place.
Can Birds Actually Start Forest Fires? (Audubon, Feb 22, 2016)


I have compared the eyewitness reports in this case to the earwitness reports in the 'Havana syndrome' case a couple of times. It is interesting to see that a lawyer representing Aboriginal Australians has become involved in this. I can't imagine that the story legal implications - unless Aboriginal Australians have been sued for spreading bushfires and then blamed it on fire-spreading birds.

The U.S. lawyer Mark Zaid has become an advocate of the 'syndrome' mythology, i.e. that the sufferers were attacked, but he is shrewd enough to notice when his clients, some of the alleged attack victims, are ruining their own case by playing their recordings of crickets on TV.
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind you are debating with people for whom "Pictures or it Never Happened" is not a joke or an offhand remark... its the dogma of their Holy Scripture.


Yet another ad hom brought to you by smartcooky.
 
Please lower the temperature of the debate, folks. We don't want anything to catch fire, whether birds are involved or not.

Confine yourselves to the topic at hand which is, as ever, not one another.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: zooterkin
 
It's starting to seem like an urban legend, to me. A whole lot of "everyone has heard about" being presented implicitly as "everyone knows".

Aboriginals see birds hunting the perimeter of a brush fire. They make up a Just So Story about how Swift Kite stole Man's cook-fire for this purpose. The tale becomes part of modern aboriginal received superstition (which non-aboriginal ethnographers and anthropologists must now hold to be inscrutable, for reasons of ethical equitability).

Over time, the tale spreads into the broader Australian popular zeitgeist. Nobody's actually seen it for themselves, but everyone knows someone who has.

Did it ever actually happen? Maybe. I mean, one dude did actually tamper with Halloween candy for real. But that was a singular incident, aimed at a specific victim, not the national scourge of urban legend.

The thread title is a bit misleading. It is not an established fact that some birds use fire as a weapon. What "many experts" now seem to agree on is that the premise is at least plausible, and there are many reports of seeing birds retrieve burning sticks from active fire fronts.

I agree that the premise is plausible. I love me some tool-using corvids. If my sister told me over Thanksgiving dinner that she'd seen a news item about crows doing this, I'd not see any reason to dispute it. Why argue about the cleverness of crows over Thanksgiving dinner?

But if we're going to be skeptical, and examine the actual evidence, it's all folk tales, and people repeating the folk tale in the form of an alleged personal experience. Which is exactly the kind of anecdote you'd expect, if the folk tales are true. But it's also the kind of anecdote you'd expect, if the folk tale is not true, but widely known and accepted as true.

At some point, we need to see the other end of the process: The bird that arrives in unburned savannah with a burning twig in its beak, that it drops to start a fire, and then waits around for the fire to catch and the prey to flush out. Ideally we'd see a flock of birds, following the torch-bearer.

If it were me, I'd invest in a couple long-loitering drones with good cameras, and start working every single Australian brush fire I could get to. If this is a real phenomenon, it should show up sooner or later.
 
It's starting to seem like an urban rural legend, to me. A whole lot of "everyone has heard about" being presented implicitly as "everyone knows".

Aboriginals see birds hunting the perimeter of a brush fire. They make up a Just So Story about how Swift Kite stole Man's cook-fire for this purpose. The tale becomes part of modern aboriginal received superstition (which non-aboriginal ethnographers and anthropologists must now hold to be inscrutable, for reasons of ethical equitability).

Over time, the tale spreads into the broader Australian popular zeitgeist. Nobody's actually seen it for themselves, but everyone knows someone who has.

Did it ever actually happen? Maybe. I mean, one dude did actually tamper with Halloween candy for real. But that was a singular incident, aimed at a specific victim, not the national scourge of urban legend.

The thread title is a bit misleading. It is not an established fact that some birds use fire as a weapon. What "many experts" now seem to agree on is that the premise is at least plausible, and there are many reports of seeing birds retrieve burning sticks from active fire fronts.

I agree that the premise is plausible. I love me some tool-using corvids. If my sister told me over Thanksgiving dinner that she'd seen a news item about crows doing this, I'd not see any reason to dispute it. Why argue about the cleverness of crows over Thanksgiving dinner?

But if we're going to be skeptical, and examine the actual evidence, it's all folk tales, and people repeating the folk tale in the form of an alleged personal experience. Which is exactly the kind of anecdote you'd expect, if the folk tales are true. But it's also the kind of anecdote you'd expect, if the folk tale is not true, but widely known and accepted as true.

At some point, we need to see the other end of the process: The bird that arrives in unburned savannah with a burning twig in its beak, that it drops to start a fire, and then waits around for the fire to catch and the prey to flush out. Ideally we'd see a flock of birds, following the torch-bearer.

If it were me, I'd invest in a couple long-loitering drones with good cameras, and start working every single Australian brush fire I could get to. If this is a real phenomenon, it should show up sooner or later.


Agreed, except for the FTFY word and that it has become part of a more general Australian zeitgeist. I am not sure about that one. I don't know where everybody in this thread is from, but we have at least three Australians: one appears to be a firm believer, another thinks the witness accounts are reliable, particularly the accounts from alleged expert witnesses, but he claims to remain skeptical, and the third is very skeptical of the stories.

It would be interesting to know how large a percentage of Australians believe that their raptors spread fire. Many articles treat it as a fact that they do, apparently based either on the ethno-ornithological study or on other articles based on that study, so it is possible that a majority of Australians actually think it's true. The headlines of many articles appear to make the claim but are more skeptical in the main text, and we know that many people don't read more than the headlines.

I haven't found any surveys or polls about the belief.
 
He [Penn State geographer Dr. Mark Bonta] plans to travel to Australia soon to assist Gosford [an Australian lawyer who represents the interests of aboriginal people in Australia’s Northern Territory] with the field study research, and hopes that they’ll gather photographic evidence of the behavior during this year’s Northern Australian fire season, which (due to El Nino) is predicted to be long and severe.
Can Birds Actually Start Forest Fires? (Audubon, Feb 22, 2016)


Notice that another attempt was made in 2018, and this time they didn't depend on the random fires and their random locations. This time it was controlled and organized:

Those Gosford and his colleagues solicited photos and videos of the behavior, they haven't yet received any usable footage. They hope to document the behavior in the field later this year, by closely studying a series of control burns administered by local firefighters.
"The more word gets out on this, the better," says Bonta. "It's only a matter of time."
Why These Birds Carry Flames in Their Beaks (NatGeo, Jan 8, 2018)


That it's only a matter of time is what believers always say to keep their hopes and dreams alive. (If you don't believe me, try googling "it's only a matter of time" + Bigfoot. In fact, do so even if you do believe me!)
The information about controlled fires administered by firefighters ruins the idea of out-of-control fires where videographers can't be allowed to get in the way of hardworking professionals who are busy trying to prevent the fire from spreading.

I think it's safe to assume that no raptors were caught on video spreading fire in 2018 in spite of a whole series of controlled burns.
 
Agreed, except for the FTFY word and that it has become part of a more general Australian zeitgeist. I am not sure about that one. I don't know where everybody in this thread is from, but we have at least three Australians: one appears to be a firm believer, another thinks the witness accounts are reliable, particularly the accounts from alleged expert witnesses, but he claims to remain skeptical, and the third is very skeptical of the stories.

It would be interesting to know how large a percentage of Australians believe that their raptors spread fire. Many articles treat it as a fact that they do, apparently based either on the ethno-ornithological study or on other articles based on that study, so it is possible that a majority of Australians actually think it's true. The headlines of many articles appear to make the claim but are more skeptical in the main text, and we know that many people don't read more than the headlines.

I haven't found any surveys or polls about the belief.

I'm stipulating that the paper cited upthread, the one with all the anecdotal evidence, establishes the general acceptance of the folk tale in the Australian zeitgeist.
 
Back
Top Bottom