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:
Peter Loring Borst <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:54:08 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
> When BIP first started it really seemed like a good idea, figure out how to keep beekeeping statistics and apply it to research. I have a hard time believing the people involved are not smart enough to figure out what they are doing. Some of there work is great and really cool so I know they are darn smart.  

Well, I thought the same sort of thing: 1) good idea at the start; 2) they are darn smart; 3) confusing or inconclusive results. However, after speaking with a couple of them, I came to a different conclusion. They have amassed a huge amount of data, and it is very difficult to interpret. There are many correlations, but these correlations may not mean what they appear to mean. 

The example they gave is that they found that people who replaced combs frequently lost more bees than those that didn't. Does this mean replacing combs is bad for bees? Of course not.  What it *may mean* is that people who are losing a lot of bees start replacing their combs, thinking this will help, but it doesn't. 

Hence the problem with correlation vs causation. To show that A causes B is not a matter of accumulating statistics. The road to finding out what the most effective practices are may not be through statistics at all. 

You hear the same thing about medical research. "They spend all this money saying they are looking for a cure for cancer but they never found one. Probably they don't want to, because then what will they do?" Turns out there isn't only one thing that is cancer, there are many cancers and many causes. Neither is there one cure to be found. 

When researchers go to work on a problem, they don't know if they will solve it beforehand, but they have to present the idea in such a way that people will believe they could solve it, using the proposed method. Otherwise, nobody would fund it. As far as "Who are the better beekeepers, commercial or amateur?" -- that question is a waste of time.

PLB

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2