Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 74
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Belfast, Ireland
    Posts
    393

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by gmcharlie View Post
    There have been several observations that Stromness and borderman are one in the same.... no proof just studies that show....
    They think the same but they are not even the same gender!
    They do know each other though.

    That 4 dog defense is a laugh.
    No matter what way you chose to disagree with borderbeeman he can shoe-horn it into one of the categories and shout 'told you so'

    It is beyond his comprehension that people disagree with him simply because a lot of what he posts is inaccurate, exaggerated and spun.

    Everyone knows that insecticide kills insects but as Barry says why are millions of colonies exposed to neonicotinoids not in difficulties.
    Canada and Australia are two places which spring to mind - and yes I am sure he can come up with some data which shows some losses in both places but Barry's point is still the crux of the matter.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    DuPage County, Illinois USA
    Posts
    9,323

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by jonathan View Post
    They think the same but they are not even the same gender!
    They do know each other though.
    I think they share the same roof.
    Regards, Barry

  3. #43
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Garland, Bladen County, NC, USA
    Posts
    2,911

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    I think they share the same roof.
    Very similar IP numbers? Would not surprise me.
    “Don’t tell me how educated you are, tell me how much you have travelled.” - The Quran

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    223

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by Rader Sidetrack View Post
    > Where do you really live?

    According to info he posted in May 2012 on another Beekeeping site, Borderbeeman lives in "
    the Scottish Borders - Coldstream, on the river Tweed". You can read the rest here:
    http://www.biobees.com/forum/viewtop...ghlight=#75419


    More on Coldstream, Scotland here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coldstream


    Unfortunately, we share a common first name, Graham, but other than that we have no connection.

    Regardless of its content, this posting obviously breaks the RULES set by Barry Birkey at the head of this Forum. Those rules clearly state:

    No harassment
    No bullying
    No invasion of privacy
    No abuse or hatred
    No threatening behavior
    Be civil at all times

    I have written to Barry Birkey twice - reporting this poster as breaking every one of those rules.
    Mr Birkey has done nothing. He has not removed this offensive post which is clearly intended to threaten, harass and intimidate. It is also a deliberate invasion of privacy.

    So what does one do when the Moderator refuses to Moderate?
    What does one do when the Moderator refuses to honor the code of decency which he himself set?
    what does one do when the Moderator appears to enjoy joining in with the abuse?

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    223

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    it is quite clear from the tone and stance that you take that:

    You have NO interest in discussing or debating these issues in a civil manner
    Your only role here is to attack, intimidate, harass, threaten and abuse
    Your posts do not address the CONTENT of the argument

    The only conclusion, from your appalling behaviour is that you are the lead attack dog representing the industry on here, and your role is to:

    Suppress reasonable discussion and debate
    Threaten, harass and bully anyone who takes an anti-neonics position
    Drive them from the arena of debate by persistent personal attacks

    It is also clear that you have the support of Mr Barry Birkey, since he has done nothing about correcting your behavior and has refused to take down your offensive posts.

    What does that tell you about Mr Birkey's loyalties?
    what does that tell you about WHO is controlling this Forum?

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    223

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    So the 'Moderator' - the alleged 'creator' of this Forum chooses to join in the personal attacks and intimidation as well?

    No attempt to discuss the issues
    No attempt to discuss the facts
    No attempt to set an example for other users in terms of decent behavior and reasonable debate

    Your posting says more about you and the moral tone (or lack of it) which you are responsible for on this Forum than I could ever say.

    No point in REPORTING this to the 'Moderator' is there Mr Birkey?

    what does one do when those who are supposedly 'The Rule Makers' - refuse to conform to the rules which they themselves are happy to break?

    Don't worry, its a rhetorical question.

    I don't expect an answer from you.
    or reasonable debate
    or fairness
    or even a sense of honor

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    223

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    . .

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    223

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by hpm08161947 View Post
    Very similar IP numbers? Would not surprise me.
    Have you ever thought about addressing the subject under discussion?
    Have you ever thought about sticking to the content of the debate>
    Have you ever thought . . . . . .
    I thought not.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    223

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Jonathan, you are not paying attention.
    The four Dog Defense is now The Five Dog Defense.
    It was decided that a FIFTH strategy of the poison manufacturers and industry trolls was:

    SUPPRESSION OF DISSENT

    It's odd that you forgot that because that is your primary role in the various Forums where you ply your trade.

    As usual, you make no attempt to engage in real discussion.
    You make no attempt to address the many peer-reviewed science studies which prove to anyone with a free mind (i.e. a mind uncontaminated by pesticide dollars) that neonics are a primary cause of bee deaths.
    Your veiled slur on my friendship, or not with Stromness Bees merely highlights the fact that your techniques, which you have used for years on the Scottish Beekeeping Forum, are:

    Defamation
    Innuendo
    Slurs and personal attacks
    Distraction
    Smokescreen

    However, your main role is undoubtedly SUPPRESSION OF FREE SPEECH.
    That is what you are paid to do.
    So I expect nothing better from you.

    By the way, you are failing.
    Truth will out.
    Truth IS out.
    27 countries just banned your favourite poisons, despite all your efforts.
    I hope you don't get paid by results, because European Science just crushed your gonads in a vice.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    DuPage County, Illinois USA
    Posts
    9,323

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by borderbeeman View Post
    What does that tell you about Mr Birkey's loyalties?
    what does that tell you about WHO is controlling this Forum?
    A shill, through and through! Yes, Bayer owns this forum. I sold it to them 2 years ago. Does it all fall into place now?
    Regards, Barry

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Belfast, Ireland
    Posts
    393

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    A shill, through and through! Yes, Bayer owns this forum. I sold it to them 2 years ago. Does it all fall into place now?
    He has no sense of humour. That will get quoted as fact now!
    So Bayer outbid Syngenta and Monsanto then?

  12. #52
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    I'm a proponent of the 3D's: deflect, delay, deny.

    Unfortunately, it's impossible to design an experiment that proves cause and effect in field trials because you can't control for all of the other possible environmental factors.

    So while we all pretty much know that insecticides kill insects, we also understand that you need proof to force a ban on a product.

    It would be 'unjust' to do otherwise.

    However, you can prove translocation in field trials!

    So, we know that neonic contaminated talc is blowing across fields and the product is going off target.

    Yes, you can ban a product for going off-target...

    Eventhough you were never able to prove that it killed bees.

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Belfast, Ireland
    Posts
    393

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    No argument about the planter dust talc. That kills bees and has been responsible for many incidents in several different jurisdictions. Germany imposed a temporary ban after several thousand colonies were killed in 2008 during maize drilling.

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    223

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    A key defense used by the Pesticide Lobbyists on this Forum is that:
    "The science is not convincing; the science does not prove anything"

    The European decision came only after the European Science Agency had considered the issue for over a year, and then after the Expert Science Panel of the European Food Safety Agency had analysed over a hundred peer-reviewed scientific studies. These people are at the top of their game, globally.
    Take a look at the Expert Panel that advised the European Commission to ban neonics.

    THE SCIENTISTS WHO BANNED NEONICS IN EUROPE

    EFSA's expert panel considered all the peer-reviewed evidence on bee deaths and neonicotinoid pesticides: over 50 peer-reviewed studies. they issued three Risk Assessments on Imidacloprid, Clothianidin and Thiamethoxam. They advised the Commission that there were unacceptable data gaps in the risk assessments; there was strong evidence that neonicotinoids affect bees and pollinators, and there is a high degree of 'scientific uncertainty'. They concluded: the Precautionary Principle must be invoked, for a moratorium until the pesticide industry could prove its products do NOT harm bees - which it has so far failed to.

    This panel included leading European experts:
    Dr. Alf Aagaard Denmark - Eco Toxicologist
    Dr Theodorus C.M. Brock - Aquatic Ecology, University of Nijmegen,
    Prof Ettore Capri : Chemistry, Biochemistry and Ecology, Milan
    Dr Sabine Duquesne Ecological risk assessment of pesticides
    Prof. Metka FILIPIČ Professor University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Pharmacy
    Prof. Antonio F. Hernández‐Jerez Epidemiology and Clinical Investigation
    Dr. Karen Ildico Hirsch‐Ernst - Toxicology expert
    Dr. Susanne Hougaard Bennekou Toxicology risk assessment of pesticides
    Dr. Michael Klein - Pesticides & Environmental fate modelling
    Dr. Thomas Kuhl expert on risk assessment for pesticides
    Prof. Ryszard Laskowski Ecotoxicology & Risk Assessment
    PD Dr. Matthias Lies Ecological systems & Environmental risk assessment of chemicals
    Dr. Alberto Mantovani risk assessment of endocrine active substances
    Prof. Colin Douglas Ockleford
    Dr. Bernadette Christine Ossendorp pesticide residues
    Dr. Daniel Pickford -ecotoxicology and endocrine disruption
    Prof Robert Smith Environmental risk assessment of pesticides
    Prof. José Paulo SOUSA assessment of PPPs towards soil organism
    Prof. Ingvar Sundh Microbial ecology research in natural and managed environments
    Dr Aaldrik Tiktak Mathematical models of pesticide fate
    Ir. Ton van der Linden soil chemistry, soil microbiology, toxicology

    The Commission evidently trusts the Scientific competence.

  15. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    jonathan:

    I recently attended an online conference where representatives from the companies producing neonic coated seeds acknowledged that they are working on new formulations to fix the seed coat abrasion problem.

    So, there's no denial by anyone of the contaminated talc problem.

    There's no need for 4 or even five dogs here.

    The translocation experimental design is the only dog needed, and it hunts!

    Here's where it al started:

    GREATTI M., SABATINI A. G., BARBATTINI R., ROSSI S., STRAVISI
    A., 2003.- Risk of environmental contamination by the
    active ingredient imidacloprid used for corn seed dressing.
    Preliminary results.- Bulletin of Insectology, 56: 69-72.

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Edinburgh, UK
    Posts
    223

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post
    jonathan:

    I recently attended an online conference where representatives from the companies producing neonic coated seeds acknowledged that they are working on new formulations to fix the seed coat abrasion problem.

    So, there's no denial by anyone of the contaminated talc problem.

    There's no need for 4 or even five dogs here.

    The translocation experimental design is the only dog needed, and it hunts!

    Here's where it al started:

    GREATTI M., SABATINI A. G., BARBATTINI R., ROSSI S., STRAVISI
    A., 2003.- Risk of environmental contamination by the
    active ingredient imidacloprid used for corn seed dressing.
    Preliminary results.- Bulletin of Insectology, 56: 69-72.
    Fixing the planter dust issue will not stop neonics killing bees. The planter dust is full of very high concentrations of the raw poison - it is many thousands of times above the lethal dose by ingestion - so it kills on direct contact. If there is NO planter dust, that poison will be absorbed into the living structure of the entire plant and will emerge in the flowers, pollen and nectar. Dozens of studies have proven that the level at which canola and corn are contaminated - in the nectar and pollen (corn relevance is pollen only) - that dose is way above what kills bees in the lab.

    So, a 'good' planting of corn or canola, in which there is no mass bee-kill at time of planting, merely sets the scene for colony deaths later in the year - usually in the winter, when the bees have collected and stored pollen and nectar that is poisoned by minute amounts of neonics in the ppb range.

    The planter dust issue is a distraction.

    How would you like your bees killed?

    10,000 hives in a single day - as happened with planter dust in the Rhineland in 2010

    or

    1 million colonies dying over the winter after exposure to sunflower pollen and nectar (France 1994)

    You could possibly opt for one or the other, but the result is exactly the same - fast death or slow death - the colonies end up dead.

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Belfast, Ireland
    Posts
    393

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Yes, I have read that paper.
    There is certainly room for improvement with regard to the escape of planter dust and beekeepers should be compensated for that.
    As far as I know this issue is largely confined to corn/maize drilling.

    The Krupke et al paper (2012) discussed this.

    Multiple Routes of Pesticide Exposure for Honey Bees Living Near Agricultural Fields

  18. #58
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Flora,IL
    Posts
    2,646

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by jonathan View Post
    Yes, I have read that paper.
    There is certainly room for improvement with regard to the escape of planter dust and beekeepers should be compensated for that.
    As far as I know this issue is largely confined to corn/maize drilling.

    The Krupke et al paper (2012) discussed this.

    Multiple Routes of Pesticide Exposure for Honey Bees Living Near Agricultural Fields

    Did you read Randy Olivers article, where he points out it only seems to be an issue under high humidity??? My hives are next to corn, and i have never noticed a problem, but in fairness most of it is no till, which has much less planter dust.

  19. #59
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Rader, Greene County, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    5,698

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by borderbeeman View Post
    The only conclusion, from your appalling behaviour is that you are the lead attack dog representing the industry on here ....
    Apparently this diatribe is directed at me.

    All I want to know is when am I going to get my payoff/bribe check from the Monsanto / Bayer evil empire?


    Perhaps you could provide a contact name I could speak to when the check does not arrive in a timely manner ....




    gee, and all I did was provide a link to a public forum, where you posted your own information!
    Graham
    --- Victor Hugo - "Common sense is in spite of, not the result of, education.”

  20. #60
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Coopersville, Michigan
    Posts
    260

    Default Re: Neonicotinoids The Four Dog Defense

    <Farming worked well for over a thousand years here in the UK without pesticides of any kind. Britain was the bread basket of the Roman Empire from AD 64 to AD 400 and after that it exported wheat and barley to the world for centuries. It is a fallacy that crops cannot be raised without pesticides. Organic farmers do it all the time. A world record yield of rice was achieved recently by an Indian farmer with no pesticides whatever- check out this article:>

    This always bothers me. Define "well"
    Yes there was farming, but you need a history lesson if you think that the farmers had it made back then, not to mention famine, brutal labor, spoilage and waste. The article is nice, yes if we can find chemical free ways to improve yield we should, but I wouldn't rule them out either. Bet you if those same farmers could increase their yield further with a chemical they would do it, or if they could mechanize the weeding process they would to that too. I spent enough time working/living on farms as a kid to know what is involved. I evn tried running a CSA last year and after factoring in my labor and input costs (chemical free) I probably made a good 2 dollars an hour. I wouldn't charge more because I was selling food and wanted to provide it at a resonable competitive price. The only people making a go of it that was are charging "yuppy prices"

    Fact is though like it or not pesticides make farming cheaper and easier. And cheaper means more people get fed. I'm sure we could drop all pesiticides from crop production and after a billion or two people died we'd be able to feed everyone by plowing up even more lab to account for lower yields and increased spoilage due to pest damage.

    It reminds me of a couple of years ago after the earthquake in Haiti. Monsanto offered to donate a bunch of seed (hybrid seeds no GMs) to help get farmers back on their feet. the offer was refused and instead the farmers were given hoes. Here you go, please continue to farm the "old way" and eke out a meager existance while I buy cheap food at the giant supermarket. talk about a slap in the face.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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