Finding it hard to follow some of the recent dialogue and getting 
useful information from it.  At the risk of oversimplifying, here is a 
rough attempt to rank the information value of different sources or 
presentation modalities of information:

1) Raw data, numbers measured, prior to processing by authors, usually 
only available in appendices or directly from authors, provided one 
understands how the data were collected.

2) Summarized data in tables, figures after authors have chosen a way 
of presenting it.  Sometimes the massaging or stats can cover up gaps 
or show the authors biases.

3) Direct reports from those who observed a phenomenon, not necessarily 
collected in a "scientific" way.

4) Indirect reports or anecdotes collected by a third party in an 
effort to summarize a topic in a uniform and comprehensive fashion.

5) Quotes from the Discussion or writings of authorities in various 
areas of apiculture.  Discussions tend to be summaries of the authors 
opinions, highly speculative and generally try to make as much as 
possible about the limited value of findings.  Writings by people 
considered knowledgeable or experts in the field are just that, their 
informed opinions on topics at the time of the writing.

6) Quotes on related topics from other fields.  May be interesting and 
intriguing, but if not provided with context and critical analyses of 
the value and application to bees, beekeeping, etc. can actually derail 
the conversation.



 

             ***********************************************
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