> To me, the answer to this question should have direct
> relevance on the von
> Frisch theory that a waggle dance gives the bees precise
> directions to a
> nectar source by the angle the bee dances. If bees can't see
> in the dark,
> then this would all the more support the idea of Adrian Wenner and
> associates that odor is the focus of a waggle dance, not sight.

Why would movement have anything to do with the signaling of odor? That
is we see bees using scents to communicate when they fan their glands at the
entrance to the hive. Why do we want to belive that to transmit odor they
run
around in a circle?

In a dark hive the "waggle" seems a good way to get the attention of other
bees.
The grooming behavior of some mite resistant bees is triggered by a "waggle"
for
example. The communication of compass direction, while oriented to a
vertical plane
would seem to require some form of abstraction (is up north to a bee as it
is to us?).

Language has become a loaded word in this debate. There is no need to assume
that the
waggle dance is a complex set of syntax that can convey abstract concepts,
but rather
a very finite syntax that serves a very limited function.

#/usr/bin/perl
while(<>){r/language/syntax/ig;print}