Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 85
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,401

    Post

    > Hey, Jim! Clint was talking about suspending YOU!

    I can't imagine why.
    Feel free to propose it to the powers that be,
    but there are no grounds for even suggesting it.

    Please re-read indypartridge's comments posted
    June 27th - she quotes someone who does NOT
    bother to participate in this list, and thereby
    avoids the slings and arrows, yet says exactly
    what I've said. Funny how no one gets all hot
    and bothered when Jamie Ellis says exactly what
    I've been saying.

    > I've seen people tossed for less antagonizing
    > than you do.

    The only reason why something may seem
    "antagonizing", is that it is a rhetorical
    argument that defies refutation. [img]smile.gif[/img]

    Its is a sad, but fairly recent (post 1994)
    development on the internet that so large
    of a percentage of the people using the networks
    can't seem to comprehend the difference between
    disagreeing and being disagreeable.

    Post AOL/Compuserve, and the opening of the
    net to the general public, people stared to
    band together into small tribes of like-minded
    individuals, shunning those who might offer
    alternative viewpoints.

    Those of us who made a living patching up
    the leaky pipes of "the net" for a quarter
    century were not happy at all with this. In
    horror, we realized that we had created networks
    and software that facilitated alienation,
    sometimes hatred between people.

    So much for the whole "global village" thing.

    > If you wern't... you'd been gone long ago.

    Sorry, but that's a very personal attack, both
    on the integrity of the folks who moderate, and
    to a lesser extent, upon me.

    You first appear to accuse whoever moderates
    the various groups of some sort of favoritism
    that certainly does not exist, and you second
    presume to both create a policy that simply
    does not exist, and accuse me of violating it.

    The solution is simple - if you can't tolerate
    rebuttal, don't dish out flat statements as if
    they were engraved in stone, moreso when they
    might encourage new beekeepers to adopt practices
    that could endanger their bees, and cause yet
    another person to give up the craft.

    In short, yeah I'm a pragmatic hard-nose, but I
    don't hold the slightest animosity towards anyone.
    If you get angry, that's only because you can't
    see me grinning as I type.

    I'd LOVE to see someone prove that any random
    bee, when downsized to "small cell", naturally
    frustrates varroa reproduction. Whoever does
    it will become famous, perhaps rich from all
    the speaking engagements. I merely asked for
    volunteers.

    So, who wants to be famous, perhaps rich?
    Anyone?

    Remember, I said I'd help tweak it up, and
    help to get it published in a real
    peer-reviewed journal where it will be blessed
    as Science with a capital "S". (I'd prefer
    to get in the "Journal of Economic Entomology",
    as that is where it would "fit" best.)

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    The Scenic Flint Hills , KS
    Posts
    5,159

    Post

    >Sorry, but that's a very personal attack, both
    on the integrity of the folks who moderate, and
    to a lesser extent, upon me.

    Perhaps I should appoligize, I certainly did not mean it to be a personal attack, just a personal observation that I am sure is seen by many others here.

    >You first appear to accuse whoever moderates
    the various groups of some sort of favoritism
    that certainly does not exist, and you second
    presume to both create a policy that simply
    does not exist, and accuse me of violating it.

    Perhaps we should re-read the rules of conduct?

    "You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use the BeeSource Bulletin Board to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree to be civil. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by BeeSource.com."
    Bullseye Bill in The Scenic Flint Hills , KS
    www.myspace.com/dukewilliam

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,401

    Post

    > You agree, through your use of this service...

    Don't be shy now, if you are going to CONTINUE
    to make accusations, at least be specific. [img]smile.gif[/img]

    Perhaps you'd rather use the "private message"
    thingy, as such things are best taken offline
    so as to not to bore others. Better yet,
    e-mail me at any of:

    jfischer at supercollider dot com
    bee-quick at bee-quick dot com
    james dot fischer at gmail dot com

  4. #64
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina
    Posts
    3,598

    Post

    Hey Jim,

    what's this supercollider business?
    I thought they killed that 10 years ago.
    Did you take it over or something??

    Dave

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,401

    Post

    > what's this supercollider business?
    > Did you take it over or something??

    No, I inherited it by consensus.

    Fair warning!
    Boring story with 0% bee content below!

    When the superconducting supercollider was first
    proposed, very few scientists were in favor of it.
    It would provide limited value (proving things
    that were already generally agreed to HAVE to be
    true), at a cost that rivaled the defense budget.
    Lots MORE good science could be done by spending
    the tiny amounts of money spent on science
    elsewhere. (Cheaper to let CERN build theirs,
    and go over there and use the toy if we wanted
    to, which was exactly what ended up happening.)

    There were lots and lots of letters, studies,
    and impassioned pleas written. I wrote one
    myself. At the time I was at AT&T Bell Labs,
    so we put up a gopher server (this was long
    before html and "the web") as a central
    repository for information both "for" and
    "against". A library of sorts. This allowed
    everyone to "publish" their own views without
    flooding the journals with "letters", and
    turning the journals into something akin to
    a Yahoo Group, Bee-L, or alt.politics.talk
    on UseNet.

    So, think of "BeeSource", except everyone
    wearing a white lab coat. There was not
    much back-and-forth discussion, but there
    was lots of very good analysis.

    We called the machine "supercollider", for
    obvious reasons. When GW Bush took office,
    and started people digging a deep circular
    ditch in his home state, AT&T legal asked
    me to get it out of the research.att.com
    domain and put the machine in its own domain,
    as they did not want to risk having AT&T
    being excluded from bidding on bits of the
    project, or viewed as "disloyal" to the
    stated goals of the administration.

    Hence, "supercollider.com"

    When I left the Labs to become a beekeeper
    and live in the nether regions, AT&T asked
    me to "please take THAT domain with you",
    so I created "The Information Supercollider",
    which (at the time) was the most powerful
    supercomputer owned by a private individual,
    a loosely-coupled array of DEC PDP-11/70s,
    AT&T 3B20s, and Pyramid array processors
    connected with fiber channel.
    (Yeah, I'm a pack rat about processing power)

    The concept was simple - take some data, and
    accelerate it to nearly the speed of light,
    and bang it against other data, so that only
    truth survives the collision. [img]smile.gif[/img]

    What paid the bills was work for radio
    astronomers, take gigs and gigs of 1s and 0s,
    and make pretty pictures. Sort of a Photomat
    for pictures of the "deepest portions of the sky".

    Nowadays, anyone can rack and stack PCs or Macs,
    load up some Beowulf Cluster software, and
    be limited only by their floor space and
    electric bill. Many colleges have impressive
    arrays, even some high schools have more gflops
    than they know what to do with.

    But its been my e-mail address for soooo long,
    I'll keep the domain, even if I end up scrapping
    the current array (Sun Sparc servers, bought
    for pennies on the dollar after the dot com crash).

    Aren't you SO glad you asked? [img]smile.gif[/img]

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    1,649

    Post

    >Boring story with 0% bee content below!

    Well, that part was right. I'm not sure I actually believe much of the rest of it, however......

  7. #67
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Raleigh, North Carolina
    Posts
    3,598

    Post

    Jim,

    actually it is kinda an interesting story
    at the time they were argueing about putting it in GW's backyard or mine. There was talk of putting in here in NC.

    As for honkin big machines, I put together a Beowulf cluster back then with ~30 pentium PC's.
    (back when 100MHz was screamin)
    We thought it was awesome. Used it to design camshafts for NASCAR racecars for GM. Lot's of gigaflops/$
    We were college students
    No white coats
    holey jeans, ratty tee-shirts and long hair

    Dave

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Mosquero, NM
    Posts
    47

    Post

    > Hey, Jim! Clint was talking about suspending YOU!

    >>I can't imagine why.
    >>Feel free to propose it to the powers that be,
    but there are no grounds for even suggesting it.

    And, there, folks, you have it in a nutshell. You can't help someone who won't acknowledge that they have a problem.

    Too bad this thread deteriorated so from its original subject.

    Mr. Bush, if you haven't totally abandoned this thread, I would like to say I have enjoyed reading of your experiments and observations. And also those of the posters who have addressed the issue.

    Mr. Bemrose, I have to say I agree entirely with your assessment. I think anyone reading in this forum for a week or so would quickly recognize that.

    Meanwhile, I wonder if there isn't some space where those of us who want to read about and share with others our studying of the honeybees might be able to do so without the static interference of individuals with obvious unaddressed personal issues which only detract from the discussion at hand. Too many of the adult discussions in this forum are being constantly interrupted by a child screaming for attention and, if it isn't given, dropping a load of his **** in the middle of the room where the discussion is being held.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Guatemala
    Posts
    244

    Post

    This is an open invitation to join back to the original topic.
    Personally, I do beleive that shorter emergence of the adult bees can have a detrimental effect on mites. Once yhe bee emerges, there is no longer any "protection or food for the maturing mites". I would like to compare it to uncapping the brood cells one or 1.5 days earlier: I bet the bees would be unable to hatch !!

    There is one point which I have not seen on this thread: mites love drone brood more than worker brood. Do small cell bees also make drone cells smaller? Are small cell drones also hatching sooner?

  10. #70
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Milford, MI
    Posts
    328

    Post

    Do small cell bees also make drone cells smaller? Are small cell drones also hatching sooner?
    I have not seen many drones the size of the Hindenburgh lately, but generally speaking, from my experience with retrogressed bees they still make drones the same size as they did on foundation of 5.4mm. But the size of my drones do vary a great deal. I'm still trying to figure out what size it is that triggers the queen to lay a drone in a particular cell. Queens vary a great deal in size and I'm trying to study two hives of different size queens to evaluate whether or not the size of the queen determines how far she can fit her abdomen in a cell and whether or not this is a deciding factor on her choice to deposit a fertilized egg or not.

    Neither queen has a problem laying brood in cells as small as 4.4 to 4.6mm, but I can't tell yet what the size is of the smallest drone cell.

    Yes the drone cells of smaller sizes are hatching sooner, but again, the size of these cells vary a great deal, and the larger cells do take longer for the drone to hatch out.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    233

    Post

    i think it has to do with their life cycle and brood's devolopment dates

    of course i'm tired today and i could be crapping out my mouth
    \"You\'ve got to stop beating up your women because you can\'t find a job, because you didn\'t want to get an education and now you\'re (earning) minimum wage.\"<br /><br />-Bill Cosby

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    The Scenic Flint Hills , KS
    Posts
    5,159

    Post

    I will see some drones laid in my PermaComb (5.1mm) I can't tell you if they actully hatch. The majority of the drones are normal size and are hatched from cells drawn inbetween the frames.
    Bullseye Bill in The Scenic Flint Hills , KS
    www.myspace.com/dukewilliam

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    233

    Post

    but generally the cell size dictates the length of time it takes the bee from cocoon to emerge

    still crapping out my face here
    \"You\'ve got to stop beating up your women because you can\'t find a job, because you didn\'t want to get an education and now you\'re (earning) minimum wage.\"<br /><br />-Bill Cosby

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    The Scenic Flint Hills , KS
    Posts
    5,159

    Post

    Sorry I can't tell you the length of time it takes for hatching, but I can tell you that the 5.1 cell size hives have less mites than the hives with standard foundation just by reading my trays in the fall.
    Bullseye Bill in The Scenic Flint Hills , KS
    www.myspace.com/dukewilliam

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,127

    Post

    &gt;Do small cell bees also make drone cells smaller? Are small cell drones also hatching sooner?

    From my observation SOME of the drone brood in small cell is LARGER and some is SMALLER. I have no idea why, but there seems to be more variety of sizes. But to be honest most of my bees aren't really small cell, but rather natural cell, so the worker cells vary in size also.

    I have not tried to measure capping and emergence times on different sized drone cells, but I would expect they would be simlar to the differences in worker brood e.g. that the smaller ones would emerge earlier and the larger ones later.
    Michael Bush bushfarms.com/bees.htm "Everything works if you let it." ThePracticalBeekeeper.com 40y 200h 37yTF

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Bradenton, FL, and Davenport, IA, USA
    Posts
    930

    Post

    Jim,
    Bees build in 3/4/5 proportions. Members of different sub-castes tend to work together, so bees of smallest size tend to work on projects with other bees of the same sizes. If these bees build drone cells, they will be 4/3rds the size of their worker cells.

    If you want to test this you can use a sift to filter out the different sizes of bees and hive them. See what happens. This has already been done by several people, and maybe they published maybe they didn't, but I have done a little of this checking for fun and its about right on. If you can keep the bees from drifting back, you get combs of different sizes depending on what you have in each hive, and its a consistent 3/4/5 proportion.

    I don't want to hear any gruff until you try it yourself. No one here has the wind at their back and no one is required to publish and no one is required to satisfy your particular needs. If you want verification they go ahead and verify it for yourself. Maybe its enough for each of us that "we see xyz, and so do 5 other people I know" if good enough. You mgith want to make that more like 10 people, or 100 because there are tons of people here and on other lists that will tell you to shove it simply because you require excellence in data structures and editting which really has nothing to do with beekeeping nor does it interest most beekeepers to keep tables of events. It bores the heck out of me just thinking about it.

    I know this, my hives are all natural cell. I lost a total of 3 hives in 3 years now, and none were due to varoa as either direct result or subcumming to 2ndary diseases that resulted from varroa. They were all absconds because of wax or beetle.

    All of my hives buildup so strong I can't afford the lumber to split them up as often as I would like.

    As far as comb width is concerned. I use 32mm topbars. The combs cheat here and there, but its repairable from a long term standpoint. They cheat larger than 32mm because they build honey at the top of the comb, when they are done building honey and start building brood below, the combs are most visibly narrower. If I install combs at the earliest opportunity in spring, they build the combs perfectly without cheating larger. The cheat gets bigger as the season goes on and they are storing more honey in the tops of the topbar combs.

    You don't need documentation to see it yoruself, just do it. Stop whining and just do it. Forget not having time, you have time enough to complain and keep this thread and others going to months, so you must have time for something if you get off of here, off of your butt and out in the beeyard and build some hives and try things out yourself. I don't care what you document, just try it and get a feel for it. Learning how to feel your bees will help you a lot more than reading numbers. I know my bees, I know what to expect from each hive, not because I documented it but because I know my bees and I can feel them as I approach. I know when they are going to be heavy with honey or nastier than ordinary simply because I feel and pay attention to it, not because I documented it.
    Scot Mc Pherson<br />McPherson Family Honey Farms<br />Davenport, IA<br />BeeWiki: <a href=\"http://beewiki.linuxfromscratch.org\" target=\"_blank\">http://beewiki.linuxfromscratch.org</a> <br /><br />Pics:<br /> <a href=\"http://linuxfromscratch.org/~scot/pics/bees/\" target=\"_blank\">http://linuxfromscratch.org/~scot/pics/bees/</a>

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Bradenton, FL, and Davenport, IA, USA
    Posts
    930

    Post

    of course 32mm in brood nest, not honey pot.
    Scot Mc Pherson<br />McPherson Family Honey Farms<br />Davenport, IA<br />BeeWiki: <a href=\"http://beewiki.linuxfromscratch.org\" target=\"_blank\">http://beewiki.linuxfromscratch.org</a> <br /><br />Pics:<br /> <a href=\"http://linuxfromscratch.org/~scot/pics/bees/\" target=\"_blank\">http://linuxfromscratch.org/~scot/pics/bees/</a>

  18. #78
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    1,933

    Post

    Just read through the tread, I didn't know what I was missing! I think the "crossfire" style brought out some very good information and brought a good variety of individuals to the debate, despite some unnecessary harsh words. I think the freedom to be harsh and not kicked off in the end sometimes contributes to debate more than it hinders it.

    From what I have read from the many contributers of this subject, a new beekeeper, or beek looking to expand would be foolish to not give small cell or natural cell a try. In the case of natural cell all you've got to loose is your chance to contribute your money to makers of foundation. For large scale beekeepers I can understand a reluctance to invest time into changeing over and would possibly require more "proof". Of course if you want something done you've got to do it yourself. I see the small cell propnents doing this to a degree acceptable to themselves and enough for me to try. Plus there is the AHB study. By not looking seriously at it and changeing over if your observations suggest it, you risk being behind the times, still bateling mites, when the studies finally get published. Again, I enjoyed the debate, a good devils advocate can bring infomation out.

    just my two cents

    p.s. We got the super collider in Oak Ridge. nya, nya! [img]smile.gif[/img]

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama
    Posts
    536

    Post

    Scott,

    I enjoyed your post.

    Could you tell us how many hives you had during the three years in which you lost three hives?

    I'd also like to know if you did anything besides use natural cell comb in your hives. Drugs, mite treatments, etc?

    And are these TBH's or Langstroth hives?

    Thanks.
    Rob Koss

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,127

    Post

    BTW I got the rest of Huber's book posted. It's here:

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

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

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