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:
"J. Waggle" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 5 Sep 2007 14:16:22 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
Robert Writes:
"Of course. The rest of the article is fine, but dodgy assumptions deserve 
to be questioned!"


Hello Robert,

I agree that assumptions deserve to be questioned.

Thank You for sending the 'off list' letter, but I’d rather cc. the list 
if that’s ok.
 
BUT in defense of what IS 'written in the actual content of the 
document’.  I fail to see the existence of ANY assumptions that you say 
exist in the portion of the article that so troubles you.

An ‘assumption’ is by definition:
“Something taken for granted or accepted as true without proof; a 
supposition”

‘Possibilities’ is by definition:
“Something that is possible.”  (not stated as fact)

An expression of a “possibility” (as stated several times in the document) 
is NOT an assumption, because they are NOT claiming (OR assuming) it to be 
a FACT, only that it is a “possibility".  


You may however question the claims of “possibilities” that are made in 
the document, as they do suggest a few.

Best Wishes,

Joe Waggle ~ Derry, PA   
‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' 
http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/HistoricalHoneybeeArticles
FeralBeeProject.com 

******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at:          *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm  *
******************************************************

ATOM RSS1 RSS2