Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: wild bee's????

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,593

    Post

    >The article was sited as proof that there was a honeybee, similar to the current honeybee being kept today. It did not classify the bee as a honeybee, nor make any relationship to today's honeybee.

    "The first is the same as the common bee of Europe, with which it agrees, not only in size, shape and color, but also in its disposition and manners, and in the qualities of its honey and wax." Sounds like a honey bee.

    >I have never read any accounts of North American tribes keeping bees or using honey.

    I do know the Lakota had a name for honey and honey bees and it's not just a "made up" name like they have for monkeys and camels and other non-native things.

    >The time frame of the author / text puts it 200 years after colonization. The text does not discuss the origin of these bees.

    Except the writer is under the impression they are native bees.

    >Yes, I know all about Dee Lusby's claims.

    Interesting, having had many long conversations both on line and by voice, I've never heard Dee Lusby CLAIM anything about Native American Bees. I HAVE heard her ask the question whether they exist/esisted or not and heard her say she would like to know the answer to that question.

    Lucky for you, Jim, you already know the answer.

    Of course when I was a kid there was no proof that the Vikings ever came here before Columbus and to insunuate the possibility was verbotten in educated circles. Don't even think about the Celts coming here before that. That's just preposterous.
    Michael Bush bushfarms.com/bees.htm "Everything works if you let it." ThePracticalBeekeeper.com 40y 200h 37yTF

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,401

    Post

    > I do know the Lakota had a name for honey and
    > honey bees

    If they do, I've got 3 friends who grew up
    on the Oglala Sioux reservation ("the rez", as
    they call it), and have never mentioned it, which
    would be strange given that bees are mentioned
    around here just as often as physics, and they
    have done their level best to try to make me
    semi-fluent in their favorite language, even
    naming our Corgi "Pah-Su" for us.

    What word is said to mean "honey", and what story
    goes with the word? (Nearly all Sioux nouns have
    long and apocryphal stories behind them or
    associated with them that do a good job of giving
    a history.)

    > I HAVE heard her ask the question whether
    > they exist/esisted or not

    ...over and over and over again! [img]smile.gif[/img]

    Let's not split hairs - if you want to deny
    that she has ever taken that stance, fine and
    dandy, but there is no other possible source
    of that specific bit of "rural legend".
    (Suburban legend?) [img]smile.gif[/img]

    > Lucky for you, Jim, you already know the answer.

    It appears that you think that you know
    differently. I remain open to any new evidence
    you might care to present, as long as it is
    actual evidence rather than mere innuendo.

    I admit that I have tried to stay current on what
    has and has not been found to date, and what we
    have is clear evidence of solitary stingless bees
    evolving into "social" and "gregarious" stingless
    bees in the western hemisphere. With all the
    evidence found of THOSE bees, how could a strain
    of proto-honey bees somehow not leave similar
    evidence? No, don't tell me - let me guess -
    they were also somehow very good at playing
    "hide and seek".

    > Of course when I was a kid there was no proof
    > that the Vikings ever came here before Columbus

    Well, if you wanna call Newfoundland (the closest
    the Vikings can be proven to have come) "here", or
    if you wanna call San Salvador in the Bahamas
    (the closest Columbus ever came) "here", you are
    welcome to do so. I've sailed to both, and both
    are trips that need to be planned and provisioned
    with care, as one crosses more than just bit of
    open ocean from the coast of the US to both.

    > and to insunuate the possibility was verbotten
    > in educated circles

    Says who? Which specific "educated circles" are
    you referring to? I'd like names, please.

    The story of Columbus taught to you ("prove the
    Earth was round", "find a passage to India") was
    a clear fabrication created by Washington Irving,
    one that did not exist before he wrote it.

    The Earth was generally known to be round at least
    as early as 165 BC, when Crates of Mallos wrote
    of not only a solar system that circled the sun,
    but of a consistently roundish set of planets,
    including the Earth itself.

    > Don't even think about the Celts coming here
    > before that

    Of course the Celts have been here forever.
    I've been to many games at the old Boston
    Garden, and I assure you that it was a truly
    antiquated structure, perhaps older than the
    pyramids of Egypt! Appropriate for a team
    that kept starting the same ever-aging white
    guys for games of basketball from the time I
    was a kid until I was an adult. The reason
    they won so many home games was that only they
    really knew where all the loose wood was on the
    court surface. [img]smile.gif[/img]

    But don't waste your time trying to educate the
    likes of me - please argue with the honeybee
    genome and the fossil record instead, and try
    and convince them that they are "wrong" or
    "lying". They will appear to listen politely to
    your arguments, and then just lay there, not
    saying a word, showing you exactly what they show,
    providing elegant evidence of a very specific
    history.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    S.E. Oklahoma
    Posts
    337

    Post

    Don't know much about sufficient proof (or lack thereof) regarding the presence of bees or Vikings, but this article about a State Park in Oklahoma re:Viking visits is one to view. Take a look and as with most things, draw your own conclusions.

    http://www.kotv.com/okt/runestones.asp

    P.S. Interesting how this thread changed course??

    Cheers,
    David

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,593

    Post

    >If they do, I've got 3 friends who grew up
    on the Oglala Sioux reservation ("the rez", as
    they call it), and have never mentioned it, which
    would be strange given that bees are mentioned
    around here just as often as physics, and they
    have done their level best to try to make me
    semi-fluent in their favorite language, even
    naming our Corgi "Pah-Su" for us.

    Does your corgi have a big nose? Or is he just nosy? Of course depending on how you pronounce the "u" (more or less nasal) it might have some different meanings.

    I've only known the old people to know the words for things that don't come up in common conversation. A lot of the old words are pretty much only known by them. I like to use them just to see the old people smile and the young people look confused. [img]smile.gif[/img]

    >What word is said to mean "honey",

    Lakota-English Dictionary Rev. Eugene Buechel, SJ 1983 edition Page 501 left column near the bottom:
    t'uh'mun'ga tunkce - honey bee
    (MDB note: I don't understand why, but tunkce in other contexts means excrement or breaking wind)
    t'uh'mun'ga wigli - beeswax
    t'uh'mun'ga tanka - bumble bee

    as opposed to

    Buechel: pg718 right column middle of the page
    fly - tannicala

    Buechel: pg 116 left column middle of the page.
    canhanpi - tree sap - maple sugar - sugar

    as opposed to:

    An English Dakota Dictionary by John P Williamson 1992 edition page 84 right column:

    honey-comb n. Tuh'mag'as'in

    Also Dakota-English Dictionary by Stephen R. Riggs 1992 edition page 480 left column

    tuh'ma'gac'esdi - honey

    >and what story
    goes with the word? (Nearly all Sioux nouns have
    long and apocryphal stories behind them or
    associated with them that do a good job of giving
    a history.)

    I have heard several stories verbally from the elders. When I get time I will try to find some that have been published, but I'm not sure if there are any published or not.

    > Let's not split hairs - if you want to deny
    that she has ever taken that stance, fine and
    dandy, but there is no other possible source
    of that specific bit of "rural legend".
    (Suburban legend?)

    There is a lot of difference between asking the questions and making a stand. I hardly see it as splitting hairs. If I say for a fact that something is true that is a far cry from asking if it's possible. Inquiring minds ask questions.

    >> Lucky for you, Jim, you already know the answer.
    >It appears that you think that you know
    differently.

    No, I just know that I don't KNOW the answer.

    >Well, if you wanna call Newfoundland (the closest
    the Vikings can be proven to have come) "here", or
    if you wanna call San Salvador in the Bahamas
    (the closest Columbus ever came) "here", you are
    welcome to do so. I've sailed to both, and both
    are trips that need to be planned and provisioned
    with care, as one crosses more than just bit of
    open ocean from the coast of the US to both.

    I think you're behind on your reading. There is some evidence now of both Vikings and Celts on the North American continent as far South as Connecticut.

    >> and to insunuate the possibility was verbotten
    >> in educated circles

    >Says who? Which specific "educated circles" are
    you referring to? I'd like names, please.

    I just insinuated a possibility that can be neither proven or disproven and have to be reprimanded by you for insinuating the question.

    >The story of Columbus taught to you ("prove the
    Earth was round", "find a passage to India") was
    a clear fabrication created by Washington Irving,
    one that did not exist before he wrote it.

    And was taught to me in school as historical fact.

    >The Earth was generally known to be round at least
    as early as 165 BC, when Crates of Mallos wrote
    of not only a solar system that circled the sun,
    but of a consistently roundish set of planets,
    including the Earth itself.

    Certainly and every culture I know of believed it to be round except perhaps a few stubborn individuals from time to time. A little known librarian in Alexandria calculated the diameter of the earth quite accurately more then 2000 years ago.

    >But don't waste your time trying to educate the
    likes of me

    I have noticed that.

    > - please argue with the honeybee
    genome and the fossil record instead...

    A lack of proof of existence does not prove a lack of existence.
    Michael Bush bushfarms.com/bees.htm "Everything works if you let it." ThePracticalBeekeeper.com 40y 200h 37yTF

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Kiel WI, USA
    Posts
    2,368

    Post

    <<Take a look and as with most things, draw your own conclusions.>>


    Well, I glanced at the site, and was struck by the fact that it reminded me of the book I'm reading right now. "Lake Wobegon Days" by Garrison Keillor.

    It seemed an appropriate book since my girlfriend and I made a road trip out to Wagner, SD this weekend to visit John and buy a carload of equipment. Nice guy, good equipment, good prices, highly recommended.

    Mapquest said it would be about ten and a half hours, one way. We did it in eighteen hours of driving; round trip, with a swing by the Corn Palace for fun. And the best part? I never got behind the wheel. Not. One. Time. We even outran the storm on the way home, clean roads from Albert Lea all the way to the pub in town. She's definitely a keeper

    Anyway, runestones. I quote: "... the Lake Wobegon runestone, which proves that Viking explorers were here in 1381. Unearthed by a Professor Oftedahl or Ostenwald around 1921 alongside County Road 2, where the professor, motoring from Chicago to Seattle, had stopped to bury garbage, the small black stone is covered with Viking runic characters which read (translated by him): "8 of [us] stopped & stayed awhile to visit & have [coffee] & a short nap. Sorry [you] weren't here. Well, that's about [it] for now."

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Round Top, New York - Northern Catskill Mtns.
    Posts
    1,895

    Post

    >The article was sited as proof that there was a honeybee, similar to the current honeybee being kept today. It did not classify the bee as a honeybee, nor make any relationship to today's honeybee.

    "The first is the same as the common bee of Europe, with which it agrees, not only in size, shape and color, but also in its disposition and manners, and in the qualities of its honey and wax." Sounds like a honey bee.

    Michael, I was talking about the first link that was sited as proof of a honey bee when it was about the tropical stingless bee. Not, your history text here.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,401

    Post

    > Does your corgi have a big nose?
    > Or is he just nosy?

    Yes, and yes. All corgis do, and all corgis are. [img]smile.gif[/img]

    I wonder if the Lakota stories place the "honey"
    and "bees" in a temporal context or not. Early
    beekeepers had so many swarms that there was
    more honey available in the woods outside european
    settlements than there was in the hives!

    > A lack of proof of existence does not prove a
    > lack of existence.

    If you are going to try and throw my own
    quotes back at me, the line I created for
    the bumper stickers was "Absence of Evidence
    is not Evidence of Absence", and the less tongue
    twisty version "Absence of Proof is not Proof
    of Absence", but that was in regard to bee
    imports from far away places like NZ and Oz,
    and their claims that they didn't have any
    diseases or pests and did not need to inspect
    for them. (Shortly thereafter, they "discovered"
    that NZ had widespread varroa, and OZ had
    widespread SHB, both large and obvious pests, hard
    to ignore.)

    But when generations of scientists have looked
    hard for something for a few hundred years and
    have a substantial mass of tangible evidence
    showing everything else BUT what you seek, it is
    no longer the case that you have any sort of
    "absence" of evidence.

    There are several inconveniently large 55-foot
    tractor-trailer truckloads of evidence in the
    form of fossils in collections around the
    country, and while we have lots and lots of proof
    of every stage in the development of one sort of
    bee in the Western hemisphere, we don't have any
    of the other.

    If that's not enough for you, nothing ever will be.

    [size="1"][ January 13, 2006, 08:25 PM: Message edited by: Jim Fischer ][/size]

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,593

    Post

    [Tons o' nonsense snipped...]

    I thought that was the answer to your question what is the Lakota word for honey bee, honey etc.

    If the difference between asking a question and making it a statment of fact is splitting hairs, then every scientist who purports a theory is guilty of outrageous claims.

    Michael
    Michael Bush bushfarms.com/bees.htm "Everything works if you let it." ThePracticalBeekeeper.com 40y 200h 37yTF

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,593

    Post

    >If you are going to try and throw my own
    quotes back at me, the line I created for
    the bumper stickers was "Absence of Evidence
    is not Evidence of Absence", and the less tongue
    twisty version "Absence of Proof is not Proof
    of Absence"

    Actually, I was just making what I thought was a logical statement, but since you've already made almost the same statement...
    Michael Bush bushfarms.com/bees.htm "Everything works if you let it." ThePracticalBeekeeper.com 40y 200h 37yTF

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Ads