To the Moderators, Extensively Revised:

To All,
On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 21:25:48 -0400, Joe Waggle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

 "Harbo is now saying it is caused by
exceptional developed hygienic trait as the facts
revealed and he is now abandoning the 'suppression
theory'...

...  When you fall in love with an idea, it can be very difficult to
let go when the facts start presenting themselves
proving otherwise."


I thought that both Allen and Bob as well as myself, in
http://listserv.albany.edu:8080/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0510&L=bee-
l&D=1&O=A&P=36644, have been quite clear in supporting the continued
evidence and existence of SMR; and it was done with the same documented
and published work that had been represented by the dissenting poster
saying that ““……The SMR bees do not exist”.  Contrary thoughts and ideas
are welcome when given as such; but when a poster stipulates as fact such
statements as “……The SMR bees do not exist” without substantiated
documentation and minces words contrary to fact and without a direct quote
when giving creditability to his own work; yet, refuting that what has
been carefully researched and submitted is beyond me.  I truly do not know
the motives of such posts; my thoughts are given here alone as I realize
that there are many reading BEE-L fairly new to serious beekeeping and the
war against the Varroa. These folks may know very little about such things
as SMR, hygienic behavior, and other such matters that have been presented
and discussed; (IMO) they are open to harm from such adulterations. IMHO
to corrupt the work of Harbo and Harris, and Ibrahim and Spivak as
recently presented within USDA and private publications by these extremely
knowledgeable world renown scientists with such narcissistic nonsense that
has lately been demonstrated is clearly reproachable.

Perhaps I may have missed something, I suggest that if one is able to
present quoted published evidence supporting one’s theory please do so, I
would welcome the read as I know would others. However, if one is going to
represent one’s own words or ideas as what has previously been written in
published papers please be accurate to the letter that they are indeed
your words and your ideas and not of the published credible writer, as one
could be open to slander.  One’s creditability as based solely on the
acceptance of others; genuine mistakes can be forgiven; however, when
crying “wolf, wolf!” there better be a real wolf and not someslip shod
anecdotal evidence.

Chuck Norton

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---