> I concur with Pete, the implications of the above are nonsense.  Refuting
>suppositions, opinions, and extrapolations with actual observations and
>measured data is not kneejerk response--rather, it is simply being rational
>and logical.

That is not what is happening most of the time.  

The present response appears to be the second successive failure to address 
the substance in the original post.  Can anyone address the points raised?

FWIW, it is a demonstrable fact that people brought up in a religion seldom 
move far from its precepts, even if they reject the orthodoxy.

I submit that many of those working in 'science', particularly the softer 'sciences' 
would be equally comfortable working in religion and would not have to change 
their skill set appreciably.

I was brought up with a scientific background, and I know many practicing 
scientists, including some who have been punished by, or stigmatized by, the 
herd, soft-peddled a criticism (not happening here today) or have had to drop a 
hot-button subject for self-preservation.  

Tell me you have not observed this and I will believe you -- not.

I could go on.  While I have to express respect for the type of scientists who 
put a man on the moon, and whose motto is "Failure is not an option", and 
who cannot accept anything but the utter truth as acceptable, no matter what 
the cost -- the alternative being to watch an O-ring blow out at a bad time, I 
cannot extend the same blanket respect to the output of the average science 
practitioner.

Let's face it science is a trade just like any other and just as there are dishonest 
or incompetent plumbers with the qualifications to practice, there are dishonest 
and incompetent scientists.  Who can deny it?

Let's face it.  Most, if not _all studies are flawed to some extent_.  How many of 
us would climb in to a rocketship designed by the average bee researcher, yet we 
are all riding on a spaceship that is being fiddled by people, some of whom have 
less than absolute ability, integrity, and questionable loyalties.

Don't get me wrong.  I appreciate all the studies and the work that people 
put into doing and presenting studies and discussing them here, but do I believe 
everything presented?  

Of course not -- unless they they fit with my preconceived notions, further (or at least 
do not truncate) my career, support my 'friends' who will support me in return -- or 
further my financial interests.

Why should I be different?  
---

I hope most readers recognize irony when  they see it and have a good laugh.

             ***********************************************
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

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm