> ....entirely too much emphasis is placed on the practical value of research.
> ...I only bring this up because it seems to be central to his and Dr. Rosin's
> argument against the idea that bees communicate through dancing...

Well, I personally don't get that understanding from what they are saying, or
think they are implying any disrespect for pure science or pure research.

Au contraire.  I see them as simply observing that any pure discovery of any
importance usually finds at least some minor applications and spawns more
discoveries.  This observation actually reinforces the importance of pure
science.  Their only stipulation is that pure science must also be good science,
and this is where the differences of opinion start in reference to bee language.

Adrian's criticism -- if I understand correctly -- is simply that, if the dance
phenomenon exists and is correctly understood, and if the theory is sound,
then -- given the immense significance it should have practically,
philosophically, and politically -- much more should have been expected to have
come of its discovery by now.  This is not necessarily always the case, I do
understand,  but it is hard to think of pure discoveries that do not lead to
something else over a few decades.  The lack of offspring in this instance does
tend to look a little suspicious.

It seems that the bee language theory remains essentially barren.  Such an
apparently pivotal discovery -- if valid -- should well have been expected to
bear a lot of fruit over almost a half century since its discovery, both in
useful applications and in further discoveries in related and unrelated fields.
Instead it seems to have some fundamental problems, and to be at a dead end.

The obvious lack of further discoveries and useful applications arising from
such a fundamental and amazing phenomenon tends to bring into question whether
we actually are interpreting the phenomenon correctly and whether we are able to
test and replicate it with the reliability -- either theoretically or in the
lab -- that we can even with sub-atomic events and distant phenomena off-planet.

Unfortunately the dance language theory is 'cute'.  It has a lot of intrinsic
appeal to humans.  This appeal is entirely independent of the theory's ability
to be proven conclusively or put to use, and attracts people to the theory in
much the same way as a religion does.  This alone should, and does, concern some
scientists.  Scientists, to be worthy of that name, must be ready to cheerfully
change their cherished beliefs in the face of new evidence and suspend judgement
where there is lack of sufficient evidence or reason for doubt no matter how
attractive the theory.

In science, Doubt is a virtue, and Faith is a vice.  Adrian and his cohorts --
right or wrong -- do us all a service, often at a personal cost, by demanding
and testing proof.

As for pure science and funding, I share your concerns, but IMO that is an
entirely separate matter.  For anyone who thinks about these things, I recommend
Mark Winston's book, "From Where I Sit", for some good perspectives on the
question of the mutual responsibilities between researchers and the society in
which they live, and many other current topics of interest to many of us who
like bees.

Oh, and BTW, Mark and his scientist friends at CAPA -- along with a hundred or
more Canadian volunteers -- just raised over $400,000 CAD for bee research using
their own entrepreneurial efforts putting on the best Apimondia Congress ever.
Beekeepers worldwide will benefit.  This money, when combined with funds
generously donated by Canadian beekeepers will bring the CBRF about halfway to
its $1,000,000 goal.  The money will be leveraged with government and private
foundation money to do a lot of research, both pure and applied.

Some pictures of the presentation of the checks to the Canadian Bee Research
Fund and other hyjinks at the joint SBA/CHC/CAPA meeting in Saskatoon this week
are accessible from http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/ by visiting the 'What's
New' link (first item).  Sorry, no captions yet, but lots of snapshots.

allen