Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 07:03:44 -0700
From: Bill Truesdell <[log in to unmask]>
To:
        Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Real Science?
 
Adrian Wenner wrote:
 
>  What difference does all this make to beekeepers?  After a half century
> of bee language dogma, beekeepers must surely realize by now that the
> language hypothesis has been of essentially no use to them in their
> day-to-day operations. And scientists know that a valid hypothesis should
> ultimately prove useful.
 
Adrian,If the bees dance, polka, use odor, or black helicopters to locate
nectar sources is probably of no use to most beekeepers. Neither is the
knowledge of the Otto cycle to those who turn the ignition in their car.
Science is useful in that it provides solutions to questions. We do not need to
know the why of crisco and tracheal mites. We only need to know that there is a
reason it works.
To discount the bee dance as not useful to beekeepers misses the reason for
science, which is to explain and that explanation either confirms why things
happen or opens up avenues to more exploration. And that is useful to
scientists.  A valid hypothesis will ultimately prove useful, but to
scientists. And some of those valid hypothesis will be useful to engineers or
tinkerers, and then to beekeepers.
And for those who wonder what the Otto cycle is, look it up. I have long
forgot. But my car still works.
Bill Truesdell
Bath, ME
remove -remove- from email address- too much spam in the universe