I for one ignored it because it was evident that you didn't completely read the articles.  If you had, you would have framed your argument different

We disagree,  had you read many other articles you may have come to the conclusions I have,  that there are many more reports of increased Co2 increasing the sugar levels, biomass, and  number of flowers per plant, (soybeans in particular show a marked increase in florets)   
Should you ponder geometry,  you could also make a case that bees would actually have to fly less distance to obtain the same amounts of protiens (highly dependant on how and where they are located in reltionship to the hive)  
And if you study Randys report on Pollen subs  you will see a footnote where it seems that 10% protien sub was about the most effective.
So one can paint any picture they like,  we don't have all the facts.  My point was simple,  Doom and gloom seem to carry the threads,  here and elswhere.  A comment simple on human nature.

Charles
   

             ***********************************************
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