Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Fewer bees or just more Bee-S?

Posted on by admin

In today’s New York Times, Mark Winston writes a heart-wrenching column about a problem that will sooner or later come back to sting all of us in a big way—massive die-offs of bees.

There are (at least) three problems, though, with his piece:

1. Winston provides no data to support his claim about the “bee colony collapse” that we have been hearing about.
2. This is because there is no such collapse.
3. This does not stop him from writing about it.

Here are a few of Winston’s comments and the ACSH rebuttal:

MW: “But in the midst of crisis can come learning. Honeybee collapse has much to teach us about how humans can avoid a similar fate.”

ACSH: The real lesson here is that scientific claims without data aren’t worth a ball of wax.

MW: “Honeybee collapse has been particularly vexing because there is no one cause, but rather a thousand little cuts.”

ACSH: So why is he focusing on pesticides?......To

My Take - Since there is no collapse, what exacty is it we're supposed to learn?   How's this? Since the problems that do exist with honey bees are "all natural" the lesson we should glean is this; it would be a really good idea to stay away from policies that want us to "become one with the biosphere", since these“all natural” problems involve parasites and pathogens it's  a good thing to avoid both. Is that what he means? Don’t get parasites and diseases! Wow! What a novel idea!  That must be what it takes to be a writer for the NYT.   

No comments:

Post a Comment