> But weren't many of the "CCD Samples"...

I everyone working with the same definition of CCD?

It has been pointed out more than once that 'non-CCD' colonies in at
least some cases were never confirmed not to be in the process of
collapsing shortly after the researcher passed by, and it seems clear
that the term 'CCD' was used as a convenient catch-all for more than few
different phenomena.

With some exceptions, the whole discussion of CCD reminds me more of a
theological debate than science. Both theology and science involve some
speculation, but theology is built on unprovable and often improbable
assumptions, and science is supposedly built on hard facts and probable
or provable, replicable observations or extrapolation.

At any rate CCD -- and anything that could be tagged as CCD -- may have
been hard on bees and beekeepers, but it was the best thing to come
along in quite a while for anyone wanting to do some research on
anything even remotely to do with bees. And, by some stroke of luck,
'CCD' happened along just at the very time when funding for bee research
was being cut to the bone.

While 'CCD' breathed new life into the legitimate labs, 'CCD' even paid
off for more than a few with little knowledge of bees or the scientific
method, and, of course the media.

As the dust settles, it seems pretty clear that CCD was/is a chimera and
I am surprised that the term is still used with a straight face --  but
we all continue to use it.

I'm still waiting for the Rolling Stone article.

Bring on the next catchy acronym.

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html