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:
Bill Truesdell <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 15 Oct 2005 14:31:54 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (50 lines)
Someone posted that it was important to have one individual's results
even if the experiment had not concluded.

What if the results had been the opposite of what was found (small cell
did not work!). Jim would still decry what happened, but there would
have been much different responses from the small cell group. They would
agree with Jim. Let us wait for all the participants.

I am with Jim.

Purly from an ethical position, it was wrong, as well as from a
scientific point of view. To have results from one one participant in a
multiparticipant experiment not only means nothing but says a lot about
the participant and a possible agenda. Any good experiment will have the
results from all participants, so it does no good to pre-publish only
one participants findings. It only damages the experiment and makes it
suspect. Especially since it appears the publisher was a small cell
beekeeper.

Most bad science and scientific experiments start with the conclusion
and then the experiment follows to validate the conclusion, especially
if you are in a particular camp. If there are problems, they are
disregarded in order to arrive at the "right" results. Remember Cold
Fusion? Sounded good until it was tried by others who could not
replicate the findings.

The article is suspect as well as the results until all are heard from.

There were some who were interested in how to conduct a scientific
experiment. This is an object lesson on what not to do.

I recall another fad of long ago where many beekeepers were enlisted to
test the fad and when the results did not meet the proponents
conclusions, the experimenters were castigated. It does get nasty when
you go against the keepers of dogma. Fortunately, good science is more
interested in the results rather than dogma. But dogma can leave a lot
of martyrs in its wake.

My only observation is that the defenders of small cell, with one
exception (Dennis), are doing more harm to the practice than they
should. It might be an exceptional and valuable addition to beekeeping,
but I am careful around zealots.

Bill Truesdell (Yes, I have tried it, but obviously did not do it
correctly since it eventually (after 4 years) failed. All who fail do
not do it correctly. Like Bob and Allen. Must be our age.)
Bath, Maine

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---

ATOM RSS1 RSS2