Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 158
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,492

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    Then the flip side to this is ... others can only speak for themselves and not project on everyone else that the sky is falling down due to neonics. Thus, it is not fair to constantly tell people their bees are sick.
    Well, I keep this discussion for the sake of discussion, not arguments (I had enough). Basically, I agree that, for instance, people with 3rd-degree lung cancer from smoking should speak out about their health issue. But, as I was trying to show in my previous message, quite often, people sent wrong messages stating that they are (or bees) perfectly OK ... meantime having 3rd degree undiagnosed cancer - they believed that they are healthy! In case of Michael Palmer - his statement was counterproductive in exact way as many other statements from pro-against neonics people. The statement that HIS bees are doing great in the presence of neonics is just misleading statement from 0.006%

    Now, if he wanted to do something useful to the community - the great way to do so is to share his valuable expertise with concerned public. Write a book, create video about his super healthy bees... instead asking somebody why his bees are doing great. There is a great book by Michael Bush for small scale beekeepers. It would be beneficial to everyone to have the book from another Michael how to keep bees healthy at larger scale in our challenging time when averages loses are 30%...
    Серёжа, Sergey

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    Posts
    14

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    it is not fair to constantly tell people their bees are sick.
    It is unfair to the bees to assume that if they are consistently ingesting >~ 1ppb imidacloprid or similar concentrations of other neonics, that they are well. They may be surviving, however. It comes down to exposure levels, time of exposure, and secondary factors like pathogens. Probably safe exposure levels are less than what the chemical companies are telling us. Probably most of the time, our bees find forage that is not too contaminated.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Baker Oregon
    Posts
    2,370

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by cerezha View Post
    But, as I was trying to show in my previous message, quite often, people sent wrong messages stating that they are (or bees) perfectly OK ... meantime having 3rd degree undiagnosed cancer - they believed that they are healthy! In case of Michael Palmer - his statement was counterproductive in exact way as many other statements from pro-against neonics people. The statement that HIS bees are doing great in the presence of neonics is just misleading statement from 0.006%
    Umm, I am inclined to believe Mr. Palmer if he states his bees are healthy. In the scientific method it only takes one contrary finding to negate the hypothesis.
    Dan Hayden 4 Years. 9 hives. Tx Free. USDA Zone 5b.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    St. Albans, Vermont
    Posts
    5,322

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by cerezha View Post
    Well, In case of Michael Palmer - his statement was counterproductive in exact way as many other statements from pro-against neonics people. The statement that HIS bees are doing great in the presence of neonics is just misleading statement from 0.006%

    Now, if he wanted to do something useful to the community - the great way to do so is to share his valuable expertise with concerned public. Write a book, create video about his super healthy bees......
    Something useful to the beekeeping community??? Create a video?? Teach a class?? Write a book??

    Why would I ever do such a thing??

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    DuPage County, Illinois USA
    Posts
    9,397

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by cerezha View Post
    quite often, people sent wrong messages stating that they are (or bees) perfectly OK ...
    I don't see anyone saying this. There most likely are no "perfectly ok" bees. But there are commercial beekeepers with many hives next to neonic crops where their bees are OK, maybe not perfect, but nothing noticeably wrong. This is a far cry from some who are saying they lost all their bees due to neonic crops. A rather large gap here, and it should be cause for a little more reserve in how grand our statements are.
    Regards, Barry

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,492

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    ... it should be cause for a little more reserve in how grand our statements are.
    Exactly - if Mr. Palmer's bees are doing OK in neonic crops, it does not mean that the rest of 15 million beehives/colonies are doing equally well! Yes, it was my entire point that such "grande" arguments (all Australia is covered with neonics and bees are OK) are not right and misleading!
    Серёжа, Sergey

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,492

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Palmer View Post
    Something useful to the beekeeping community??? Create a video?? Teach a class?? Write a book??

    Why would I ever do such a thing??
    To share your wisdom instead asking ... sorry stupid question. Nothing personal
    Серёжа, Sergey

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lee\'s Summit, MO
    Posts
    1,300

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by cerezha View Post
    Yes, it was my entire point that such "grande" arguments (all Australia is covered with neonics and bees are OK) are not right and misleading!
    But where's the evidence that bees in Australia are not okay? I've heard nothing to indicate otherwise. I could make all types of claims of Australian bees but if there's no evidence they are merely unfounded claims.
    Ninja, is not in the dictionary. Well played Ninja's, well played...

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
    Posts
    834

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Yes, it is the unfounded claims that are hurting the discussions of neonics. Making big but unsupported claims obfuscates the issues, and makes it much harder to figure out what is really happening to bees. Which, could possibly be the whole point of such posts, I guess.
    Last edited by shinbone; 05-15-2013 at 10:47 AM.
    --shinbone
    (3rd year, 14 hives, Zone 5b, 5400 ft, 15.8" annual rainfall)

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,492

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by D Coates View Post
    But where's the evidence that bees in Australia are not okay? I've heard nothing to indicate otherwise. I could make all types of claims of Australian bees but if there's no evidence they are merely unfounded claims.
    Look
    If you want peaceful meaningful discussion on the substance of this thread - go to the beginning and read the initial statement opening the thread. My point (if you read carefully) in the recent post was that sometime people do not see the evidence (my example with cancer smoker, see above) or even worse - they do not want to see the evidence. In such situation, instead real evidence, they prefer to do "grande" conclusions regarding entire country AND at the same time ignore the fact that 27 european countries ban neonics beginning December for 2 years.
    Серёжа, Sergey

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
    Posts
    834

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Data, data, data! I want to see data! I don't care about analogies. I don't care about what some famous person said. I don't care about pretty language. I don't care about politics. I don't care that someone posted a million vacuous posts. I want to see good data produced by good science. If we don't have good data, then we can't make a good decision, and no amount of blah blah will change that. If we don't have good data, the next step is to generate good data, rather than jumping to premature conclusions.

    JMHO
    --shinbone
    (3rd year, 14 hives, Zone 5b, 5400 ft, 15.8" annual rainfall)

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lee\'s Summit, MO
    Posts
    1,300

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    I read it, and I read it carefully, and yes I picked up the condecending tone too. You seem to be fine ignoring the evidence that there's no smoking (puin intended) gun in Australia but seem to be quick to condemn others for not seeing the "evidence". I see the lack of Australian issues as evidence that neonic's are not the boogieman others claim.

    You disagree, and post "...27 european countries ban neonics beginning December for 2 years." as evidence of guilt. Yet no guilt has been proven. If it was they wouldn't ban it for only 2 years. Then you move on to the sky-is-falling 3rd stage undiagnosed cancer reference..., (so by that thinking I have cancer until I prove otherwise?)

    So be it, but you have some of the same blinders on that you are accusing others of having. Yours merely are blinded to the opposing evidence.
    Ninja, is not in the dictionary. Well played Ninja's, well played...

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Suffolk, VA
    Posts
    2,559

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by cerezha View Post
    To share your wisdom instead asking ... sorry stupid question. Nothing personal
    Perhaps this may help you better understand Michael Palmer's response. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm
    Horseshoe Point Honey -- http://localvahoney.com/

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Suffolk, VA
    Posts
    2,559

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by cerezha View Post
    Now,another aspect of your statement: I was not able to find exact numbers, but it seems to me that rough estimate is that North America has approximately 15 million beehives/colonies. You have 1000+, which is approximately 0.006%. I am sorry, but from statistical point of view, your operation is not significant to draw ANY conclusion sorry about that. The same as my example (see above) that having unhealthy lifestyle promote good health - would not be accepted by any health organization... on the basis that it is not statistically significant.
    I highly suspect that you're not parsing this data very well. First, it would make much more sense to compare commercial operations than simply comparing the total number of hives in the US to MP's 1000 hives - simplistic at best. I suspect that there are on the order of 1400 (perhaps far fewer) commercial operations in the US. Now, before you start comparing and jumping to statistical "conclusions", e.g., 1/1400, one must first survey all 1400 and evaluate methods and practices for each and then start looking at the many factors leading to survival rates among this group. There may indeed be some statistical significance to MP operation, but it certainly cannot be ascertained as you suggest.
    Horseshoe Point Honey -- http://localvahoney.com/

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Suffolk, VA
    Posts
    2,559

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by cerezha View Post
    Exactly - if Mr. Palmer's bees are doing OK in neonic crops, it does not mean that the rest of 15 million beehives/colonies are doing equally well! Yes, it was my entire point that such "grande" arguments (all Australia is covered with neonics and bees are OK) are not right and misleading!

    Your statements are really quite contradictory. You didn't seem to blink an eye when you quoted the 0.006% above and how statistically insignificant MP results are. By saying 0.006% you are explicitly assuming that the remaining hives (15,000,000-1000) are NOT doing well.
    Horseshoe Point Honey -- http://localvahoney.com/

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    26,776

    Default Re: The austrlian distraction

    Quote Originally Posted by shinbone View Post
    "I wouild love to respond to your questions but the Moderator is not allowing me to post in real time or in real locations.
    I assume this is to destroy any proper conversation.
    "

    No BBM, this is because you have a long history of polluting this forum with your intentionally misleading diatribes that are void of supporting facts.

    Further, you do not engage in any type of conversation. You simply post your very political statements and then ignore any points others post which contradicted your religion.

    Mr Palmer asked :" I keep more than 1000 colonies including wintered nucleus colonies and production colonies. I made 100+ lbs/colony from the honey producers. My bees are surrounded by corn treated with clothianidin. My winter losses are between 10% and 15%...same as always since varroa arrived. Diagnosing the losses, it becomes obvious the most of the losses were from varroa.

    So, tell me why my bees aren't aren't sick from neonics.


    BBM, please explain how Mr. Palmer can have such good success when, according to you, his bees feed on such poisonous chemicals? That you won't answer this question confirms that you have no intention in engaging in a conversation and are only interested in using this forum as your political soapbox.
    He did answer the question. He wrote in Post #22 "I have no idea."
    Mark Berninghausen "That which works, persists."

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    26,776

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Palmer View Post
    Something useful to the beekeeping community??? Create a video?? Teach a class?? Write a book??

    Why would I ever do such a thing??
    Very funny Michael. Apparently Sergey is not aware of the lectures, videos, magazine articles, in progress book and Forum Posts you have contributed to the US beekeepers.

    Sergey, maybe a web search is in order.
    Mark Berninghausen "That which works, persists."

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Brasher Falls, NY, USA
    Posts
    26,776

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    I don't see anyone saying this. There most likely are no "perfectly ok" bees. But there are commercial beekeepers with many hives next to neonic crops where their bees are OK, maybe not perfect, but nothing noticeably wrong. This is a far cry from some who are saying they lost all their bees due to neonic crops. A rather large gap here, and it should be cause for a little more reserve in how grand our statements are.
    Instead of "Okay", wouldn't it be more accurate to say productive and that colony mortality is relatively low?
    Mark Berninghausen "That which works, persists."

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.
    Posts
    834

    Default Re: The austrlian distraction

    I would say that "I have no idea" is a response to a question, but is not an answer. But this is splitting semantic hairs. The fact remains that BorderBeeMan, after all his lengthy railing against neonics, turned out to be clueless on how someone could have a high percentage of successful hives in an area surrounded by neonic-laced corn - a result which is in direct contradiction to BBM's position that neonics as used in the field are deadly to bees. This shows that BBM has no idea what he is talking about, which was the main point. In other words, the emperor has no clothes.

    I will say at least he was honest in professing his ignorance. That I can admire.

    I, too, do not know what affect neonics is having on bees, but, I am not posting huge anti-neonic diatribes and making grandiose unsupported statements about the evils of neonics. I am simply trying to learn what is going on, and I quickly realized that BBM was little more than a fraud.

    All in IMHO, of course.
    Last edited by shinbone; 05-15-2013 at 05:22 PM.
    --shinbone
    (3rd year, 14 hives, Zone 5b, 5400 ft, 15.8" annual rainfall)

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,492

    Default Re: The Australian Distraction Defense

    Quote Originally Posted by AstroBee View Post
    ... 1/1400, one must first survey all 1400 and evaluate methods and practices for each and then start looking at the many factors leading to survival rates among this group. There may indeed be some statistical significance to MP operation, but it certainly cannot be ascertained as you suggest.
    Sure, I have no problem with this - my point was that it is not possible to make "grande" conclusions based only on MP operation. You got it right! Interestingly, 1/1400 is 0.07% - apparently my very rough estimate was (right) close (corrected!!!). In this discussion, I do not express ether for or against neonics. I merely respond on MP request that somebody should explain to HIM why HIS bees are doing well in neonics. It is non sense to me (asking somebody.....). Also, unwillingness to share success story speaking something about commercial beekeeping practices.
    Correction: 1000/15000000 == 0.006%
    1/1400 == 0.07%, 10x more
    Last edited by cerezha; 05-15-2013 at 04:53 PM. Reason: math problem
    Серёжа, Sergey

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... 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