Worst winter ever

[Dishmop]

Close, but really it's to test a novel idea not necessarily prove it.
The main purpose of the thesis is to demonstrate how you carried out the work and can discuss and also be critical of your work.
The worst possible case scenario is to think you know the answer before you do the research....lots of bums get bitten by that.

Doing research doesnt mean you know the answer........it just means you have read the research.

Nearly as good as knowing why bees died or vanished and stating that it is obvious why the bees died, but not being able to give that reason, on the grounds that we are stupid if we cant figure it out for ourselves.
What I find most insulting, not to me as I really dont give a ****, but to be critical of spelling and grammar with no thoughts as to the feeling of people who are dyslexic.

Untreated bees died. Oh yeh thats because they werent treated.
Treated bees died.......Starvation...Must be.
Untreated bees didnt die..............No answers.

 

[Thymallus]

Doing research doesnt mean you know the answer........it just means you have read the research.

You are partly right, you design experiments to test the theory because you don't know the answer. But doing research means exactly that, you do it, not read about it. Although if you wish to be pedantic there are also literary dissertations where you essentially revue the current literature relevant to a particular topic.
It also gives you the licence to ignore the irrelevant

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

What you appear to be saying is that her data backs up her hypothesis in the areas she studied.

No - she rather carefully chose the areas she studied to ensure the data 'backed' her hypotheses. Standing in the middle of Brechfa forest or kielder for that matter hoping to find any kind of honeybee, is a dead cert for proving there are none (wild or otherwise). and then using that data to state (as she did) that there are unlikely to be any wild colonies left in England or Wales is one heck of a leap of (blind) faith.

This means, at least in the areas studied she is correct,

If her statement had been there are no wild colonies in the Tywi forest well, I would believe that - but most know that anyway.But she specified the whole of Wales and england thus her hypothesis is incorrect
Regardless, it's flawed science.

 

[BeeJayBee]

No - she rather carefully chose the areas she studied to ensure the data 'backed' her hypotheses. Standing in the middle of Brechfa forest or kielder for that matter hoping to find any kind of honeybee, is a dead cert for proving there are none (wild or otherwise). and then using that data to state (as she did) that there are unlikely to be any wild colonies left in England or Wales is one heck of a leap of (blind) faith.

If her statement had been there are no wild colonies in the Tywi forest well, I would believe that - but most know that anyway.But she specified the whole of Wales and england thus her hypothesis is incorrect
Regardless, it's flawed science.

 

[Thymallus]

No - she rather carefully chose the areas she studied to ensure the data 'backed' her hypotheses.

You don't seem to understand her rationale for choosing those areas to search for isolated Amm colonies and seem to have misinterpreted it. Plus her overall data was backed from studying many other "feral" colonies at various locations elsewhere within the UK, (as an aside she found many "feral colonies" with marked queens). If you read even more carefully you will find her final conclusions are not statements of fact, just that it is unlikely.

And as I asked before, where should she have looked? So far you seem reluctant to back up your "opinion" with anything other than bluster about her original data. If you think your colonies are genuine bona fide Amms or know where there are some feral Amm colonies send her the information or even some bees for DNA analysis and stop prevaricating.

 

[Thymallus]

One does wonder how you follow any bee back to it's home.

Stick a small micro transmitter on its back as Jürgen Tautz and many others do.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

stop prevaricating.
.

maybe you should listen to your own call and finally answer Dishmop's original question instead of filling three pages of the thread with puerile waffle.

I don't really know nor care what basic tenets you need to propound a theory, what I do know is that if the statement is flawed or the evidence extrapolated to suit then it ain't worth a toss, I'm not going to play you're 'look how clever I am' game of wordplay and academic swordsmanship. After secondary education I went out into the real world and further qualifications were all technical and professional.

In the words of my carpenter father.
"I may not have gone to medical school and qualified as a gynaecologist (you can probably tell me if I spelt that correctly) .....

But I know a 2@ when I see one"​

 

[Thymallus]

maybe you should listen to your own call and finally answer Dishmop's original question instead of filling three pages of the thread with puerile waffle.

I did answer that question many many posts age. He simply chose to not believe the answer. The rest was all tree falling in forest sound crap.

I also take it from the rest of your mail that you are unable to come up with a coherent answer to the question(s) you were asked?
i.e I think its wrong but I haven't a clue, why so I'll just insult the poster.
Very mature!

 

[Dishmop]

I did answer that question many many posts age. He simply chose to not believe the answer. The rest was all tree falling in forest sound crap.

I also take it from the rest of your mail that you are unable to come up with a coherent answer to the question(s) you were asked?
i.e I think its wrong but I haven't a clue, why so I'll just insult the poster.
Very mature!

perhaps you can give us a clue as to the number of the post in which you gave an answer.

 

[pargyle]

Oh dear ... Been a bit busy today and now have to go off to work so I've missed all the fun ... I'm no academic but it strikes me we have one academic, on this thread, that seems to be arguing not about what a flawed study produced in the way of a conclusion but more that the study produced valid results which led to mainly flawed conclusions. In my book, either way, it's a load of tripe !!!

Complemented by some Finnish tripe - nothing new there either !

 

[Thymallus]

perhaps you can give us a clue as to the number of the post in which you gave an answer.

Have a look on page 9. Not that you will chose to believe it anyway. And as to not answering questions when are you going to to stop faffing around and answer the question you were also asked on page 9 , "What do you think is the common denominator that most likely caused the death of so many colonies?".
Pot and kettle......

 

[Thymallus]

that seems to be arguing not about what a flawed study produced
In my book, either way, it's a load of tripe !!!

Do explain why it is flawed?

The general standard of reasoning I'm seeing to date is "Its wrong because I say it's wrong". Not seen a credible single argument against the research that cuts the mustard. It seems the contra-arguments simply involve insulting the poster. Or it's the 10,000,000 flies eat sh%$t they can't all be wrong approach.

 

[Dishmop]

Have a look on page 9. Not that you will chose to believe it anyway. And as to not answering questions when are you going to to stop faffing around and answer the question you were also asked on page 9 , "What do you think is the common denominator that most likely caused the death of so many colonies?".
Pot and kettle......

Your question (common denominator)was an answer to my question.Therefore the reason I asked you the question was because I obviously didnt know the answer, so why ask me the same question as I had asked of you for an answer to? Would it not have just made sense to have given the answer?

 

[Polyanwood]

I haven't been on here for months, but am glad to see that it is still lively.

What I have learned about varroa, which most people probably think is rubbish, is that mostly you cannot see them and not that many of them seem to drop onto the varroa inspection tray. Once you can actually see them on the bees it is often too late. That colony will dwindle over winter because the high varroa load will have made them sick with viruses. I have had the worst winter losses when I did not treat (shook swarm or apiguard) early enough. It seems that the biggest colonies (that have produced the greatest number of bees over the summer) are the ones likely to be hardest hit if you let them make winter bees when they have a lot of varroa.

 

[wessexmario]

Is anyone else loosing the will to live?

Looks like the OP hasn't returned since the day he posted his request for help, 9 days ago.
But is anyone surprised given the point-scoring that's overtaken this thread?

 

[beehive1234]

Yes bees go where their forerunners have judged a good place to live, that is true. This is an instinct developed long ago. Trust your elders, they know best, syndrome. Known to lots of species.
Treatments, (which are only a few years old,) for bees and animals and humans, are a BIG BUSSINESS. The conglomerates that manufacture them, can't even guarantee that they are not copied/forged in inscrutable ways and we are at the mercy of those that can or want to make sure we and animals, insects get the real authenticated treatments.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Cuckoo overload on here now so I'm off

 

[mbc]

Cuckoo overload on here now so I'm off

Deep in your heart you know it's because you should Mr Jenkins

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Deep in your heart you know it's because you should Mr Jenkins

but not many know what my apiaries harbour, not much yellow in them nowadays i can assure you

 

[Erichalfbee]

Not like this then, JBM?