> In the minds of those who *believe* in the dance language hypothesis (as
> opposed to those who merely regard it as one of a number of interesting and
> possibly useful ideas), what single experiment would it take to prove
> absolutely that the dance language hypothesis is untenable, or at least open
> to serious question?

If the believers were doing science, then the experiments described in chapter
10 of the Wenner and Wells book would suffice.  However, by and large what
I've read is advocacy, not science.  The Smith and Otis articles in ABJ is a
prime example.  If they were doing science, then their attitude would include
"where ever the data takes us".  When they subtitle their article "A
controversy resolved" they project their attitude, which permeates the
text, that is "this is final".  That ain't science.

When I saw the Smith and Otis article noted on the front of ABJ, I looked
forward to reading it.  I found it very disappointing.  Just a rehash, nothing
new, nothing interesting.  It showed either a failure to read Wenner and Wells
or a failure to understand it.  Plus an abysmal lack of understanding of the
subject matter of "Scientific Reasoning 101".


Greg Kendall  [log in to unmask]
Pilot, beekeeper, packet hacker, gentleman rancher.

El rancho del gato muerto   38 24 28 N  122 58 29 W

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