Someone here wrote:
“…Mr. Doug Yanega…”
“…unusual and entertaining opinions…”
“…he is not at all shy about accusing beekeepers…”
“…he has enough time on his hands…”
“…he sure needs some help from us…”
“…Explain to him that CCD spreads…” 
“…Doug seems oblivious to the obvious…”
“…He is so completely unaware of…” 
“…This sort of fringe viewpoint…”
“…combined with the hubris of claiming armchair expertise…” 
“…lots of free time on their hands…” 
“…Doug seems to still be unaware…” 
“…and he is utterly uninformed…” 
“…Doug admits to being the party responsible…”


As we see much too often on Bee-L,  attacks were directed at the person, 
instead of directed towards the content of what he has written. I would 
have loved to have seen comments on the content of the material, but it 
didn’t happen. 

This is what often sickens me, that this is allowed to occur.  Tell me 
where does character assassination fall in the “scientific method” so 
often promoted on this list?  

Is this what Bee-L is about????  

Ans why are the pundits here content to sit on the sidelines when they see 
this? and yet, choose speak up harshly at every minor factual error in 
someone’s post? ,,,Is their silence in this case promoting good science?   

I agree with the earlier suggestion that efforts would be better focused 
towards correcting information.  Lets get out of the gutter, and back in 
the beeyard!   

Best Wishes,
Joe

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