Joshua Klein's crow-training project's validity is a point of contention. The original NYTimes article was poorly researched and much was assumed/embellished through no fault of Klein. The correction the Times semi-recently published made it out to be Klein's fault, though he attempted to contact and correct the Times, to no avail. Poor journalism and self-interested/important journalists are the suck.

He very clearly gave the impression that he had trained the crows following all the steps described in his talk.

I could be wrong about the details, but it certainly wasn't the NYT's fault. They reported it as he described it.

http://www.wireless.is/projects/crows/correction.php

If what he says in his response is true, then it means that some shoddy reporting and fact-checking by a NYTimes intern did an enormous amount of damage - not just to Klein, but everyone involved in his research, including his advisor and both universities.

Regarding the talk: I agree that he does give the impression that the coin box experiment has already succeeded and he's ready to move on to more practical applications, when in fact his research is still in its early stages. It's a mistake, but a long shot from what the person in the original article has done (and what the NYTimes has potentially done to Klein's career).

Also if I ever talk to a reporter I'll take my own notes and send them to him/her and post a version on the web so it can be Googled.

I am sure Mr. Klein thought that the journalist/intern was going to practice due diligence (that would be my assumption coming from a brand like the New York Times).