Hi All,

I recently received an email which complained:

"Getting a bit tired of Randy's personal on-List attacks on anybody who does
not have the right "scientific", unambiguous answers."

I apologize to any and all who feel that I am attacking any person.

I have always been a strong debater of ideas.  I also often come across as
curt, which is likely a result of my attempt at brevity.  I apologize if I
have offended.

The last thing that I would ever want to do is to stifle discussion.
However, the name of this List is INFORMED DISCUSSION.

"Informed" to me means that you have either done some homework, or that you
have accurate observations from the field.

When one does post an idea or hypothesis, one should then expect a vigorous
and respectful discussion of that hypothesis.  On many subjects, there is
plenty of room for debate--such as on N. ceranae, neonicotinoids, CCD, and
endosymbionts.  However, it is important to be clear about what is
conjecture, and what is supported by data.  There may indeed be unambiguous
answers to specifics--like "did you actually take spore counts," or "did you
run a control group," or "a controlled trial showed clearly that there was
no correlation," or "that product was not used in that year."

Any statement not supported by data or practical experience is open to
questioning.  My cyberfriend Bob Harrison enjoys making strong, definitive
statements.  When he does so, there should be every expectation that any of
them should be questioned on their merits or on the basis for his
conclusions.  In science, there are no "authorities" who can pronounce what
is "right."  There may be experts who are familiar with the subject, but any
expert OPINION is subject to questioning.  If the opinion stands up to
scrutiny, then others may wish to make management decisions based upon that
opinion or hypothesis.

Unfortunately, management decisions are often made on faulty evidence.  We
only need to look at obvious "truths" that have later been demonstrated to
be in complete error--such as the blaming of heart disease on animal fat,
the blaming of silicone breast implants for connective tissue disease, the
blaming of vaccinations for autism, and the huge question of whether we
should change world energy policy based upon the debatable concept of
anthropogenic global warming.

I used to have the bumper sticker "Question Authority."  I'm a questioner.
And I'm happy to be questioned.  Anyone can change any of my opinions in a
minute with a good piece of evidence.

Again, if any poster ever feels that I have attacked them personally, I will
be glad to publicly apologize or retract.

Randy Oliver

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

Access BEE-L directly at:
http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A0=BEE-L