Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" |
Date: |
Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:24:02 EDT |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Message-ID: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Bob
Following on Jack's point, NSF and USDA have separate budgets - so nothing
spent by NSF would ever go to USDA for applied bee research. The Harvard
study is a NSF basic science computing exercise, and I know well one of the
investigators. \
The video surprised me - none of the team that I know has any aspirations
of producing an artificial pollinator - they're using bees as a model system
to explore computer, robotics, and information systems - much like Srini
uses concepts derived from his bee work in Australia to design better
guidance/autopilot systems for robots, airplanes, helicopters, etc.
So, none of that $10M would have ever been spent on CCD or any applied bee
science - NSF prides itself on being the agency that funds basic
exploratory science.
Jerry
***********************************************
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
Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm
|
|
|