Barry Donovan reiterated a message he had given earlier (here in small part): "[It] is consistent with the use by these bees of the information to avoid the already-discovered source." (An interesting rationale, but not very scientific.) Mea McNeil provided input on Tom Seeley's response to her questions, including his mention of Figure 3.7 in his book (which really reveals little about the issue). Seeley's response to Mia (as she posted it) was loaded with qualifications (including, "Evidently, a dance follower learns only the general vicinity of the recruitment target, she flies to this location, and then often has to execute a lengthy search to pinpoint the recruitment target."), a statement that contrasts sharply with his own statement in the book, as follows: "When a worker bee discovers a rich source of pollen or nectar, she is able to recruit nest mates to it and thereby strengthen her colony's exploitation of this desirable feeding site. The principal mechanism of this recruitment communication is the waggle dance, a unique behavior in which a bee, deep inside her colony's hive, performs a miniaturized re-enactment of her recent journey to a patch of flowers. Bees following the dance learn the distance to the patch, the direction it lies in, and the odor of the flowers, and can translate this information into a flight to the specified patch." Which is it? Do bees "fly directly out" as given in the original hypothesis, or do they search about for a long time, as specified in the odor-search model? The renowned science philosopher, Karl Popper, wrote, "Some genuinely testable theories, when found to be false, are still upheld by their admirers--for example, by introducing AD HOC some auxiliary assumption, or by re-interpreting the theory AD HOC in such a way that it escapes refutation." Likewise, Thomas Kuhn (physicist and philosopher) echoed Popper's conclusion, as follows: "...scientists ... will devise numerous articulations and AD HOC modifications of their theory in order to eliminate any apparent conflict." and "[although scientists] may begin to lose faith and then to consider alternatives, they do not renounce the paradigm that has led them into crisis." The bottom line remains as to the facts (long search times and small percentage of success) that I posted on 5 October. By contrast, those results mesh very well with the von Frisch odor-search convictions of the late 1930s and early 1940s, as well as with our odor search model (as spelled out in our 1990 book and more concisely in the following URL): http://www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/az1991.htm The bottom line remains, though: Beekeepers have not benefited one bit in regard to their beekeeping operations by using the dance language hypothesis during the past half century of its existence. That fact carries more weight than virtually any of the rhetoric we have had on the subject these past few years. Adrian -- Adrian M. Wenner (805) 963-8508 (home office phone) 967 Garcia Road [log in to unmask] Santa Barbara, CA 93103 www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/index.htm ***************************************************** * * "We not only believe what we see: * to some extent we see what we believe." * * Richard Gregory (1970) * ***************************************************** :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and other info --- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::