Ghislain De Roeck asked: > James, can you explan what you mean with 'people with agendas'? > Who are they? Why do they what they do? I would not have had a good answer a year ago. Science has made significant progress this year in answering the question "why". I think that a few studies are worth citing here, as the findings have a direct impact on many beekeeping discussions here and elsewhere on the interwebnet. "They" can be broken down into two major groups: "Impressionable Beekeepers" and "Money-Grubbers". Note that there are no "money-grubber-beekeepers", because step one of money grubbing would be the realization that anything would be more profitable than beekeeping. :) Nearly 100% of beekeepers can be forgiven for being so "impressionable". One needs to do some background reading to get a grasp of just how hard one has to work to avoid the traps of fuzzy thinking to which so many seem to fall prey: http://tinyurl.com/4myeyf or http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/10/03/control-study.html "People turn to superstitions, rituals and conspiracy theories as a way to deal with complex or chaotic circumstances... ...when people feel like there is a lack of control... they are more likely to form strong conclusions, even though there is no pattern..." The paper I cite above may explain close to 100% of the surreal and confusing conversations I've had with certain beekeepers. It was quite an eye-opener for me. Why "the impressionable" are so persistent in supporting 100% fact-free stances is an easy 3-step process in the mind of the beekeeper: 1) I believe that xyz can save the bees 2) I want to save ALL bees, yours included 3) If I must make stuff up in order to convince you, then the lying is for your own good. The 3 steps can make bogus ideas "viral". The less experienced the beekeeper, the more likely the are to be passionately convinced that they know better than you, and willing to make stuff up to win you over to their way of thinking. The "Money-Grubbers" are a different story. None of them can be forgiven, as they are conning money out of the general public in our name. The specific agendas vary, but a common theme is a pre-existing goal, and an attempt to link the problems of bees to that goal, not for the sake of the bees, but for the sake of further promoting their goal. "See, the bees are dying, we were right all along!" they shout. They skip the part about correlation and causation, of course. Examples of this would be nearly all the environmental groups who continue to claim that pesticides have something to do with CCD, despite the clear disease-like ability of the symptoms to spread among hives. Sometimes, the money-gubbers are more naked in their greed and self-serving moves. A good example would be the NRDC, who merely put up a web page about "saving the bees", collected unknown millions in donations "for the bees", yet have done nothing to help. In fact, their suit against the EPA can do nothing but hurt, as it forces to EPA to divert scarce resources from doing their job to defending against an accusation that is nothing less than the sort of paranoid delusions that would prompt involuntary commitment for 72 hours of observation. http://www.nrdc.org/media/2008/080818a.asp "The NRDC filed a lawsuit today to uncover critical information that the US government is withholding about the risks posed by pesticides to honey bees. NRDC legal experts and a leading bee researcher are convinced that the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has evidence of connections between pesticides and the mysterious honey bee die-offs reported across the country. The phenomenon has come to be called 'colony collapse disorder'..." Exactly what sort of pathology would result in this level of paranoia? What sort of comic book super-villain would be required to subvert the entire EPA? How could such a conspiracy be kept a secret for so long? How much would all this cost? Who would gain anything from killing bees? But somehow, otherwise rational people don't even raise an eyebrow at such nonsense, and some are even willing to believe that such a conspiracy could exist. Its complete nonsense, of course, but somehow, people are taken in by it. How? Well, the good news is that science can even explain the reason for people rejecting reason itself, and also explain why beekeepers seem to be so "impressionable" in the absense of the usual several gigabytes of hard data: http://tinyurl.com/3sbcns or http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080924-does-ideology-trump-facts-stud ies-say-it-often-does.html Where it is shown that, in many cases, even refuiting false claims does nothing more than reinforce the false beliefs. (There are still two schools of thought on this point, but each side has some pretty strong data.) http://dmiessler.com/blog/the-dunning-kruger-effect Which explains why people knowing nothing at all about a subject think that they know more than those who know a lot about a subject. A LACK of expertise, education, and experience apparently gives one an very unwarranted sense of confidence. These findings alone could explain the bulk of my confusion in the period since 1994 when so many newcomers appeared on the internet with so many wacky views. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11009379/ Which shows that people are very adept at making decisions without letting the facts get in the way. To make matters worse, they get "a rush" from ignoring information that's contrary to their point of view. It is almost as if the human brain was wired to be stubborn in the face of facts. More detail on this is here: http://www.duke.edu/%7Ebjn3/nyhan-reifler.pdf So, suddenly one can comprehend the statements made by those who promote the idea that imported bees are the solution to the problem of imported pathogens, diseases, and pests of bees. The idea is utter nonsense, of course, as the easiest way to import even more exotic invasive diseases, pathogens, and pests would be in shipments of live uninspected bees like the ones we are shipped every year. A very clear example of what a bad idea this can be is the movement of Apis cerana into Australia from the nearby areas of Asia where it is native. (By "nearby", I mean that lots of trade on somewhat decrepit ships goes back and forth between the two points.) The bees have spread, and become established in the Top End of Australia: http://tinyurl.com/3ho7c6 or http://home.ezezine.com/1636/1636-2008.09.28.10.45.archive.html despite attempts to kill them off, and multiple claims that they had found and killed the "last" hive: As a final note, I must make it clear that all of the above, taken together, clearly warns us that false and misleading information will follow the path of least resistance. It will get passed on by the people who are most eager to believe it, and are therefore ALSO least likely to do the homework to find out if any of it is actually true. So, even the simple case of the "eager beaver beleiver" turns into a person with "an agenda", spreading nonsense. No matter how earnest, nonsense is still nonsense. **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * ****************************************************