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:
"adrian m. wenner" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 19 Sep 2003 04:12:26 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (68 lines)
    Normally exchanges about bee "language" last only a week or so,
but this latest exchange on BEE-L has persisted considerably longer.

    When controversy erupts in science or medicine, evidence becomes
the first casualty (as someone once wrote).

    "Is it conceivable that honey bees do not have a language?"  I
often ask that question of a person who is apparently not open to
consideration of evidence in the issue.  A prompt, "No, that is not
conceivable" answer lets me know that further conversation would be
fruitless.  A long hesitation or an avoidance of the question usually
means that the person knows they should say yes but can't bring
themselves to do so.  Again, why continue the conversation?

    I always hope for a prompt "Yes" answer, because then I will be
able to direct that person to evidence at variance with the language
hypothesis, such as that evidence published by von Frisch in the late
1930s and early 1940s -- evidence ignored by bee language proponents
this past several decades.  The same holds true for the hard evidence
have published.

    Another dead give away for me: when people use terms such as THE
language of bees or THEIR language.  Surely such people would not be
open to consideration of evidence at variance with their belief
system.

    My 2002 paper ("The Elusive Honey Bee Dance 'Language' Hypothesis"
-- Journal of Insect Behavior) --
http://www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/jib2002.htm, didn't require one
and a half years but TWO and a half years of negotiation.  Now, that
is a paper that has no figures, no tables, and no statistical
analysis.  It is just a Forum paper with a statement of position.
Scientists pride themselves on their objectivity and "open minds."
Why, then, are they so afraid to allow publication of a position
paper?

    Some during this recent exchange inferred that my co-workers were
on the fringe in this matter.  Those wishing to keep dogma intact
often attempt to marginalize those who have a different position.
Anyone familiar with me and with my contributions knows better.  I
come from a long line of beekeepers and have good academic
credentials.  Those interested can access:

http://www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/index.htm


    --  To be continued in the next posting --

                                                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 ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ATOM RSS1 RSS2