Martin Giurfa writes:
>        Finally, a personal request. I think that contributions to the net
>based on popular beliefs or some kind of mystical knowledge do not help but
>simply add to a great confusion. So, I would like to have comments based on
>scientific literature and on replicated experiments. I hope that this does
>not sound aggressive. I only believe that this is the way in which all the
>people can really benefit from the net.
>.
>        Cheers,
>.
>.
>                       Martin Giurfa
>
 
Caution: (Somewhat) Opinionated response following:
It seems to me that there are two fairly distinct groups of people on this
list - the academic/scientific folks, and the beekeepers (many of whom are
"hobby" beekeepers) - I think the true benefit of BEE-L is the opportunity
for these two groups to talk to each other.  Yes, there is a significant
benefit for the scientific community as a result of the colaboration that
occurs here, and I, as a beekeeper, enjoy being on the sidelines watching
that colaboration happen, and absorbing the parts of the discussion that I
understand.  On the other hand, I find it very useful to learn what other
beekeers have learned "in the field", which leads me to the "folklore" part
of this.  There is a great deal of mis-information out in the world, and
I find BEE-L to be a good place to ask questions about folklore, and trying
to explain in more scientific terms why certain things seem to work in the
apiary - basically to improve my understanding of bees by discussing things
that don't seem to make sense on the surface.  There are a lot of people
that read BEE-L that are much smarter and more experienced than I am, and
I would like the continued opportunity to ask questions of you all, so that
I can become more informed.  I fear that by restricting BEE-L to only items
from scientific literature and replicated experiments, we will miss out on
the opportunity to learn more about "applied beekeeping", not to be confused
with the scientific understanding of honeybees.  Well - enough of this - I
think you understnad whawhat I'm trying to say.....
 
One final comment - it *IS* important to differentiate between folklore and
scientific facts, so it would be good for folks to clearly state *OPINIONS*
and folklore as such, and those stating facts continue to provide the
citations, thus making it clear what is "scientifically provable"
 
Thanks for listening!
Rick Hough, a beekeeper from Hamilton, MA, USA (a bit NE of Boston)