BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
randy oliver <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 11 Feb 2014 05:51:04 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (55 lines)
>We need to avoid buying "spin" that makes this appear the tale of an
erratic man who did poor work.

And that is what this List is all about--being informed to the extent that
we don't simply buy spin.

So far, this story has been spun at least four ways:

1.  The expected spin by the corporate entity that produces the product,
that the product in not harmful, and that Dr. Hayes' research was flawed.

2.  Dr. Hayes' spin that he has been systematically  and unfairly
discredited by the people hired by the above corporate entity.  However, it
seems that neither Dr. Hayes nor U.C. Berkeley have  sued the company for
such alleged misbehavior.

3. The spin by a non science author, Rachel Aviv (go to her website to read
her previous stories), which spins hearsay and innuendo into a compelling
story that cautiously supports Dr. Hayes' contentions (with plenty of
cautionary qualifications).

4.  The spin by a member of this List who stated that " this was
clear evidence of a specific corporate campaign to smear and personally
discredit a credentialed publishing research scientist at a top-notch
institution, rather than to simply rebut or refute the work at issue."

I reread the Rachel Aviv article again this morning.  I failed to find that
any such "clear evidence" was actually presented in the article.  Again,
the author merely parroted hearsay and innuendo, rather than presenting
hard facts of such alleged wrongdoing.

At this point let me again affirm that I am not trying to defend any
corporate entity nor any pesticide.  What I am trying to do is to point out
that this is an Informed Discussion Group.  I'm not clear how much
legitimate information was in the Rachel Aviv article.  So I hesitate to
base an informed discussion on heresay and innuendo, no matter if one of
our members spins such into "fact."

If we wish to discuss the effect of atrazine on honey bees, let's do so.

If instead, we wish to find where the truth actually lies in the "he said,
she said" argument between Syngenta and Dr. Hayes, then let's base such
discussion on credible and confirmed evidence, which to date in this
discussion has not, IMHO, been presented.

-- 
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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2