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:
Bill Truesdell <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 28 Jul 2008 07:39:56 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (51 lines)
I agree with most of what you said, since it is what I said. But there 
is a context issue.

Yoon Sik Kim wrote:

> While recognizing the dynamic nature of science—“Science is not static. It 
> is a continuing process with things being affirmed and disproved. Most 
> science stands the test, but occasionally things that were thought to work 
> one way are shown to work another or not at all”—a poster here damns 
> science for its “suggestions” and “hypothesis” without certainty. 

There was no damning but the point was a prior poster did use the 
hypothesis  as a certainty, which was pointed out by several others, 
not just me. Further research showed otherwise.

Which was my point. Any hypothesis needs proof to stand up. There is a 
difference between a hypothesis and a further experiment that 
disproves it, especially when that can be duplicated by others. I do 
realize that some will cling to the original hypothesis, but they are 
on tenuous ground without further research.

As far as certainty in science, it is mostly affirmation that is 
involved. But there is also some "certainty" in science, such as 
something as simple as NaCl and what it is and how it reacts in 
certain circumstances. I look at my CRC Handbook of Physics and 
Chemistry and there is a lot of "certainty" found in its pages.

It is when you go, with something as simple as salt, from the macro 
world (of controlled conditions) to the micro world that uncertainties 
arise.

As far as CCD. I probably missed it, but I have not seen any certainty 
as to its cause on this list. There are many camps but even they are 
circumspect.

However, there are camps where the cause has been identified, which 
was the reason for my original post, that neonicotinoids were 
identified in a magazine article as the cause of CCD. No science, just 
opinion and the carryover from beekeepers who said it was the culprit.

I will give you the neonicotinoids in the corn field. I was wrong. Bad 
example and less thought.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

****************************************************
* General Information About BEE-L is available at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm   *
****************************************************

ATOM RSS1 RSS2