From: Erik Osterlund <honeybee@elgon.se>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 22:29:59 +0200
To: BiologicalBeekeeping@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Wintering Notes

Robert

I agree fully with you here. But still I think that the word anecdotal has
been used by man in power just in the way you have described. And they
have used this word balancing between different meanings, which they
appreciate. Actually they may say they use it the way you describe which is
actually a substitution for "observation". But then this word "observation"
is the corect word to use actually. It is without any negative meaning.
It's neutral. Anecdotal is negative. When you go to the word book you don't
find the meaning of observation for anecdote, in which sense it is also
used somewhat, as you described below.

The observations that Dennis shared are very interesting. And for a
scientist these obseervations should give ideas to help form a hypothesis
of relationships. Out of this hypothesis then should follow forming of
tests to help decide if this hypothesis may be correct or false. After some
positive results we can call it a theory. After further tests and positive
results concerning the theory we hold it for being an established
relationship. If the scientist don't want to think that interesting
observations are interesting or if they don't fit his academical carrier he
probably will say that the report with the observations is an anecdotal
story. With that he means that the observations made are nothing to take
seriously. But here is the point, all scientific work begins with
observations that give idéas for forming hypothesis that are then tested.
So to give he epitet anecdotal to observations is really non scientific.

Just some further thoughts on the subject

Erik