"There is nothing new under the sun".
 
The writer of Ecclesiastes observed this some time back and it seems that
his observation applies to this list and the current topics of discussion.
 
What is interesting is IMO, with the exception of my contributions
(hehehe) and those of several other serious students of bees on the list,
 the current quality of debate does not seem to nearly match the earlier
contributions on bee nutrition.  I attribute this to the fact that as
subjects get re-hashed and re-hashed, those with respect for the subject
grow weary of repeating themselves and dwindle away.
 
To draw a parallel to our discussion of bee nutrition, provocative emotive
posts (trolls), long-winded repititious unsubstantiated professions of
'belief' and syrupy words are a poor substitute for sharing of genuine
knowledge on a topic.  They are an artificial diet for those of us who
look for real experience and real proof before believing, and who, even
then, believe only lightly.
 
I observed earlier that Andy had not put in his two cents.  On reviewing
the logs on the topic, I can see he has very, very little left to say.  He
said it all, and said it well, here as recently as Thu, 1 Feb 1996 at
05:12:00 GMT.  I won't repeat it again here, but you can access it at my
page with one click.
 
Simply go to http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/ and select "SAD and BAD
Bees"
 
Those of you who would actually like to know what has been said before in
advance of jumping into what has become a discussion of feeling much more
than fact, please seriously consider going to
http://www.beekeeping.co.nz/beel.htm and doing a few simple searches
before posting.  It will definitely change what you post and definitely
make you look a whole lot smarter than you might if you merely assume
everyone else is stupid and shoot from the hip.
 
A trip to http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~mts/apishtm/apis.htm
may take a few hours, but will put a reader on top of many current topics.
Tom has an amazing skill at chronicling the changes in beekeeping that are
taking place.
 
As for the current discussion, the issue has become clouded in rhetoric
and whimsy and imprecise use of words.
 
Just to make it absolutely clear, I think that no beekeeper in his right
mind thinks that a good quality, long nectar and honeyflow can ever be
entirely replaced by artificial feeding.
 
Having said that, those who actually care about their bees (and
themselves) have discovered and proven over and over again that -- in the
absence of ideal conditions -- supplementation pays dividends to both the
bees and the beekeeper.  Natural (whatever that is) nectar and pollen
flows are definitely preferable to both parties, and for the beekeeper,
generally much cheaper.  Sometimes profitable, even!
 
In the spirit of helping encourage people to feed their bees sugar syrup
when advantageous to both parties, and in response to an earlier question,
I am also putting up a new page of photos of our electric hive feeder at
http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/
 
Watch my 'What's New' page.
 
Allen