> Here we go again with what is Native and how looked at,
> depending upon who's heritage for discovery one is looking
> at.

Are we going to redefine words, and twist their meaning?  I hope not,

> Also, I personally still do not believe that the
> original testing (FABIS) and DNA looked at and set up was
> done with base stock properly FWIW.

This is possible, since to do such a task 100% correctly is virtually 
impossible.  Some assumptions had to be made.  However, the consensus is 
that the job was done reasonably well.  Moreover, as time passes, there are 
new methods of checking back

To date, however, there seems to be no evidence for stinging-type (European) 
honey bees in the Americas before the White Man, other than imaginative 
readings -- and likely misinterpretations -- of obscure documents.

If you torture the data enough, you can get it to say anything, even that 
bees have been universally and permanently 'upsized', or that our common 
honey bees were here all along.

If you don't torture it, though, and believe it speaks clearly and freely 
with its own voice, neither of these ideas has much credibility. 

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