According to the literature on the Nobel laureates, von Frisch, Lorenz and Tinbergen shared the prize in 1973, "For their discoveries concerning organization and elicitation of individual and social behaviour patterns." They made and make no mention of giving the prize to two for one reason, and to the third for a different reason. Go back and read the official releases by the Nobel committees if you want to confirm it.
>>However, in spite of all the evidence I provided, you seem unable to get it into your head once and for all, that dance-attendants never use any spatial information contained in dances.
I haven't seen any evidence either way on this thread, to support or refute the concept that bees use spatial information contained in dances. You've stated repeatedly that, [paraphrasing here] "Honey bees never use spatial or distance information in dances for orientation or locating sources of food." To me, that's not evidence, that's just flatly saying that you don't believe the hypothesis. Fine! You don't believe it. Now, WHY don't you believe it? Do you have data to completely refute the dance-language hypothesis?
Honestly, I see the evidence presented by both sides as tenuous. As Ruth points out, other reasons for the "dance" behavior can explain away a lot of the dance-language hypothesis. But, the evidence that opponents of a dance language keep trotting out is pretty weak. The fact that a teleological-evolutionary argument might be flawed alone doesn't refute a dance language in bees. The fact that bees can and do search by odor doesn't refute a dance language. Even in combination, the two don't refute a dance language.
>>In some cases those young bees eventually began to forage on their own, and performed perfect dances the first time they danced. In fact, it was this finding which led him to conclude that dancing behavior was "instinctive", i.e. genetically predetermined; which is an utterly unwarranted conclusion. You will understand why the conclusion is unwarranted, if you read and understand my highly plausible explanation of the dance.
Seems to me like it's still "instinctive," even if you disagree with the reasons for the dance. What about the "wagging" of the abdomen? Does it remain constant as well? Why does the distance component of the dance correspond so well to the foraging trip if the foragers are simply trying to evade house bees eager for food? How do you determine that such behavior is NOT instinctive? It couldn't be learned in this case, I'm assuming, so what else could explain it?
I see a contradiction, too, in the "sun-balancing" component of the "dance" and the shift to replacing the sun in orientation with gravity. If they're using gravity, they can no longer by balancing the physiological after-effects of the sunlight by dancing in opposite "direction" from which they returned. The transformation in other insects is real, but they don't shift between orienting in relation to the sun and orienting in relation to gravity.