>Supercedure is a real problem for some beekeepers but to pin it on
>such an unlikely cause [a 'comb positioning problem'] is fatuous.
This is a question of scientific method, and also in our context a
question of how science is to interact with other types of thinking.
This list has tried to grapple with this wide, vague, & genuinely
difficult issue - without much success, so if we see the above dismissive
assertion in that context we may make some progress.
A widespread reaction of the medical trade when Reston reported in
the NYT during Nixon's famous visit to China that acupuncture anaesthesia
works: "you say this phenomenon occurs, but you got no hypothesis for *how*
it might work, so I say the phenomenon cannot occur". One assoc prof of
physiology, also M.Sc in chemistry, retorted in the staff tea-room to my
showing him that NYT: "I know too much anatomy for that to be possible".
Not only many outside, but embarrassingly many within science commit this
fallacy.
Numerous phenomena are facts but nobody has shown how they work -
and in many cases there is little or nothing in the way of hypotheses. But
failure to discover a mechanism is no excuse to deny the reality of the
phenomenon.
Let me ram home the logic. My life was saved more than once,
decades ago, by skilled medicos using gaseous anaesthetics and other
chemicals to operate on me for some hours. Nobody had more than the
vaguest idea how these chemicals produced their effects on me; but they did
work. How needles in points on acupuncture 'meridians' may allow a man to
converse with Reston, sipping orange juice, with his chest laid open for a
lung operation was - and as far as I know still largely is - unknown.
But I believe that it does occur, at least sometimes. I will not dismiss
it out of bigotry & pseudo-science, as most medicos still do.
I join those who haven't thought of any mechanism for influence of
foundation-sheet pattern on any important hive process. I go further and
say I wouldn't put much effort into investigating the idea.
Alignment wrt the Earth's magnetic field, sun directions, etc,
might vaguely suggest some lines for theorising about how comb alignment
could affect this or that in bee biology.
But in either case, the facts come first. To postulate an
unexplained phenomenon is not inherently fatuous.
What matters in practice is how researchers are to relate to
informal reports like Dee's.
The proper response to their radical claims is for the interesting
Housel and Lusby to be invited to a bee research confab, if they will
present their ideas in as scientific a way as they can, and will then fully
take part in a moderated discussion of what research could be based on
their findings. Those who control research should observe, and participate
in, that moderated discussion. Then it can be decided how to respond to
these far out, but not quite fatuous, claims.
Get the Dubyuh regime to triple federal bee-lab funding, and to
pay state bee labs, to expand bee research for mine detection and other
military applications. You may have to create a more specific cover -
e.g GM bees to sniff out S Hussein, with no risk of being faked out by
doubles because their sweat smells different, and satellite-linked via
Windoze to smartŪ bomb delivery systems ;-} - and then siphon the money
off for close cooperation with Dee. I can make little of what she writes,
and I fear it may be too late to educate her in science; anyhow, additional
modes of communication would seem justified.
But then the typical research director will say the chances of
getting anywhere with this 'Y-pattern on foundation' claim, or even the
slightly plausible 'comb alignment' claims, are negligible, as the
phenomenon is not expected from current theory. Nail this furphy any time
it surfaces!
The other beekeeper that I know of in my suburb, a friend, lost her
bees as I did within a year of the varroa discovery. She phoned recently
to say a feral colony has settled into that hive. It must have some
varroa brought in if only by drones roaming over the whole Auckland region;
but it is evidently coping, without any volatile additives or halogenated
pesticide. I told her she may be the Grandmother Smith of the bee world,
and she should notify the govt varroa experts to come & study her hive.
She may have stumbled upon a notable mutant which may be extremely
valuable.
We are not holding our breath.
Early in the varroa emergency my best hive was thriving
impressively, and I offered it to the govt varroa experts & their
corporatized buddies, to move to a varroa-free part of NZ and breed up
nukes etc. They did not respond to a known scientist & long-serving govt
advisor. What chance is there, then, that the overworked, under-funded USA
bee labs will cooperate with Dee & Michael? They lack the resources, and
to a large extent the will, to divert from their own under-funded lines of
research onto any implausible amateur ideas. I trust no-one will
misunderstand my candour; these are interesting & important issues
deserving 'open speech and simple'.
Lack of hypothesis for how foundation patterns could affect biology
is a reason for low priority on researching the claim, but if any easy
tests can be devised they should be done. If however the tests would be
quite elaborate and divert much work from promising current research
efforts, if I were a beel lab director I'd have to forego my trip to Ariz.
Pity, as I'd like to take another series of photos of that gigantic
graveyard of B52s, B47s etc at McCord AFB.
R
|
