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:
Mon, 26 Nov 2001 08:52:05 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (63 lines)
[log in to unmask] wrote:
>
>   Ask anonymous what crop he has brought to market.


James Fischer wrote:

>      Beekeepers are both the beneficiaries of the work of bee scientists,
>      and on a practical hands-on level, a valid part of the peer-review
>      process.  Surprise!  The so-called "non-informed beekeepers" are
>      your peers, and like it or not, will critique everyone's work, sooner or
>      later.  They will not bother to write letters to the editor of some obscure
>      journal.  Their comments will be right here, out in the open, fair game
>      for any disagreement. They certainly will not try to hide behind a shield
>      of anonymity.

Two different posts have talked about experts/scientists who lurk and do
not participate on the BeeL. It brought to mind an experience I had
quite some time back when I was picked to attend a ten week mini MBA
course at a major University. My fellow attendees were all middle
managers on their way up the corporate ladder. All were experienced in
the ways of business. And the course was not graded.

It was an interesting experience. The class would tear into some
professors and reject their teaching but dialog with others and have a
good give and take. The common attribute of the latter was the
Professors all left teaching for a time and participated in business.
They were grounded in fact. Many that did not have experience were
defensive and dismissive and generally worthless. And we let them know.
The rest who did not have business experience were willing to listen and
engage in give and take. They were willing to teach and learn.

I think I understand what there are some experts/scientists that lurk
and do not participate. They cannot stand up to any challenge of what
they have accepted as fact and what experienced beekeepers might
challenge. It is much easier to think you have the answers than to place
them before a group of your peers and support them, especially if the
group has experience.

I appreciate the scientists and experts that frequent this list. It is
enjoyable to read the give and take of those supporting and challenging
"facts" and theories. I learn because the discussions are informed. And
it is even more interesting when the experienced beekeepers join the
discussion.

There are some things, as George has said, that scientists discover.
There are also things that they just validate. The whole area of
essential oils was started by non-scientists but validated by science
which showed what works and what does not. OMF and 4.9 are techniques
that are in study.

I am a bit bothered that the anonymous scientist could not post links or
names of studies that counter anything posted here. I would welcome it.
There is a great deal in the literature concerning bees and beekeeping
that never gets to the actual beekeepers. Several researchers, like
Steppo, have kindly furnished links to either prove or counter arguments
on this list. They are the scientists and researchers I value. They
understand the reason for the research is the practical world of
beekeeping, and what better place to inform than this list.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, ME

ATOM RSS1 RSS2