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:
James Fischer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 17 Nov 2015 15:35:12 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
> This is an incredibly circuitous spin...

It seems the simplest explanation of the apparent contradiction between the
opinionated critique offered on Bee-L and the published statements made by
the researchers.  (http://fivethirtyeight.com is a great place to see how
statistical analysis can provide very accurate predictions from even the
most chaotic data sets.)

> She said the survey data was big, messy, 
> and full of apparent correlations which 
> could not hold up to scrutiny.

...which satisfied the clear intent of the questioner to not believe the
survey, by making a strictly true statement that did not in any way
contradict their published analysis.  See how it works?  The beekeeper went
away, the researcher got back to work, everyone went away happy. 

All datasets from surveys can be said to be "messy". The "apparent
correlations" are ones that they did not publish, of course, precisely
because they did not survive scrutiny.   These perfectly true statements
attempt to find common ground with the view offered in contradiction, but do
not actually give any ground at all on the specific findings published.  

I am presented with this "I spoke with x, and he said HIMSELF..." argument
from time to time here on Bee-L as if it were some form of rebuttal to a
point I made using basic principles.  What the statement should be is:

"I heard what sounded like a minor concession!"
"I choose to present it as a _total refutation_ of the peer-reviewed
published conclusions!" 

> By the way, referring to my friendly 
> correspondence with Katie Lee as 
> "a tedious critique" adds nothing

Of course you were friendly.   But this does not make such inquiries any
less tedious for those who feel obligated to give an answer that is both
true and not offensive to the questioner.  It is a difficult tightrope to
walk.

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