>The problem is that the interaction misleads the layperson who questions
the

> conclusions drawn, giving them the false impression that they have found a
> powerful refutation, one that the author admits as compelling.
>

I'm going to be polite about the obvious troll, James, transparently
intended for me.

I speak on a weekly or monthly basis with many bee researchers, who not
only discuss their research and interpretations in depth, but also
frequently send me unpublished data, or their papers for  review prior to
submitting to publication.  I'm certainly subject to getting false
impressions, but I go out of my way to avoid doing so.

>If a conclusion is to be questioned, the specifics should be presented in
detail to support the questioning.

In order to maintain the good relationships that I have with various
researchers, I choose to use discretion should I publicly question their
published conclusions.  Science is a learning process, always subject to
revision.  Some can attempt to be civil about arriving at those revisions.

-- 
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html