Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

Bhima

Fri Apr 27 03:41:40 -0700 2007

manage

One more thing:  It appears that varroa mites are causing a problem with bees in Hawaii.  They have been previously mentioned as a potential vector of a new virus.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

Spider

Sat Apr 28 01:04:38 -0700 2007

manage

The varroa mite has also established itself in New Zealand in the last year or two.  It has now spread from the North Island to the South Island. Wild bees help the spread.  A big concern for those farmers that rely on the bees for pollination of their crops let alone the harvest of honey.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

ehrichweiss

Fri Apr 27 06:31:30 -0700 2007

manage

I've already read about this. The price of honey is about to skyrocket because while they can use fungicide to solve this, the resulting batch or two of honey is unable to be used. Thankfully for me one of my closest friends is a beekeeper and we haven't been hit by this stuff yet.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

Cassius Rosenthal

Fri Apr 27 08:22:51 -0700 2007

manage

Bhima says: "In any case this is a more believable cause than cosmic rays, UV light, and cell phones."

I don't find any of it believable until the hypothesis in question has survived at least one round of peer review and been published as such.  This 'preliminary study' craze that we've fallen into is stupid and dangerous.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

bill_mcgonigle

Fri Apr 27 09:09:27 -0700 2007

manage

I don't find any of it believable until the hypothesis in question has survived at least one round of peer review and been published as such. This 'preliminary study' craze that we've fallen into is stupid and dangerous.

Obviously it's not proven yet, but Occam's Razor hasn't dulled.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

Cassius Rosenthal

Fri Apr 27 09:28:20 -0700 2007

manage

How does the explanation of:
a fungus that plays an unspecified role in promoting an unspecified reaction in a specified disorder
make fewer presumptions than:
vector 'X' plays an unspecified role in promoting an unspecified reaction in a specified disorder
?

I'll answer that for you: it doesn't.  Occam's Razor is as sharp as it ever was, but it doesn't cut any fat for you here.  It certainly cannot be invoked because it makes you feel better about the explanation that makes sense to you for no reason in particular.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

bill_mcgonigle

Sun Apr 29 16:25:14 -0700 2007

manage

. a fungus that plays an unspecified role in promoting an unspecified reaction in a specified disorder make fewer presumptions than: vector 'X' plays an unspecified role in promoting an unspecified reaction in a specified disorder

Because a closely-related fungus already causes this problem in honeybees.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

Cassius Rosenthal

Sun Apr 29 20:15:36 -0700 2007

manage

From the article: " 'N. ceranae is one of many pathogens' in the bees, said entomologist Diana Cox-Foster of Pennsylvania State University. 'By itself, it is probably not the culprit …'"

bill_mcgonigle says: "Because a closely-related fungus already causes this problem in honeybees."

Radiation also causes this problem in honeybees.  Does that make radiation a likely cause?  Bush's Christianity was caused by his upbringing.  Does that make having Bush parents the likely cause of Christianity?

'Might be similar' has no place in science.  Peer review.  If it's not peer reviewed, it's speculation.  Just because it's your speculation, bill_mcgonigle, doesn't make it more valid, unless you are a scientific peer.  I am assume that you are not until you offer evidence to the contrary.  Without evidence, your speculation is useless.  Worse, your online bleating is part of the media wave that stands in the way of unbiased science being performed and accurately reported.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

bill_mcgonigle

Sun Apr 29 22:35:03 -0700 2007

manage

Wow, you must have a heck of a time coming up with likely hypotheses to test. If you don't employ deductive reasoning and Occam's Razor, you're going to have a hard time committing your limited resources to efficient candidates for testing. If you have unlimited time and money, by all means, test every possibility in any order. Not everybody has that luxury, unfortunately.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

Cassius Rosenthal

Mon Apr 30 10:46:42 -0700 2007

manage

Again, you demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the scientific process.  Occam's Razor is used for evaluating the likelihood of competing theories given different numbers of presumptions required by each theory.

In this CCD vector case, all of the theories are untested by scientific standards at this stage.  Occam's Razor doesn't apply, because the number of presumptions for each are equally large.

This has zilch to do with "coming up with likely hypotheses to test."  Obviously, there are plenty out there that should be tested, and testing will reveal which ones are likely and which are not, which will lead to further testing, etc.  When you prejudge all of the hypothesis with a bias towards one in particular, you pull the rug out from under the scientific method.

Here's the point: with your hapless speculation, which has no place in scientific process, you are suggesting that the you have an insight into this science, which you do not have.  No evidence has been given that makes this 'more likely' than any competing theory, because none of the theories have been tested and peer-reviewed.  All theories have a likelihood between 0 and 1 at this stage, and your suggestion to the contrary is false.

If you are going to be an armchair scientist, and critique a scientific study, at least understand the bounds within which you can opine.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

bill_mcgonigle

Mon Apr 30 12:53:32 -0700 2007

manage

You don't understand my point. Let's do a though experiment:

The honeybees are all going to die this year and become extinct unless you can find a cure. There are 100 hypotheses as to why and you can only test one hypothesis at a time and each one takes 2 weeks to test. Rank the order in which you will do your tests to find which one is the actual problem.

Are you suggesting that any ranking human experts could come up with are just as valid as throwing a random number generator at the problem? That's like digging up a new dinosaur skeleton and assuming that it's just as likely to be giant fish that looks like a dinosaur than a dinosaur. Sure, there's a chance, but it's not as likely.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

Cassius Rosenthal

Mon Apr 30 14:36:09 -0700 2007

manage

bill_mcgonigle says: "Are you suggesting that any ranking human experts could come up with are just as valid as throwing a random number generator at the problem?"

Are you an expert?  No; you are not.

It's not up to you to decide which is 'more likely.'  Experts will submit their opinions, and peers will review that opinion.  *After* testing, we will have some basis for 'likely.'  Your claim that one hypothesis is more likely than the other, is hogwash.

You sir, are not an expert.  You certainly don't honor the scientific method.  Don't pretend to be, and don't pretend that you do.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

bill_mcgonigle

Mon Apr 30 16:31:45 -0700 2007

manage

Oh, so this was just another ad hominum attack of yours disguised as a something to do with the philosophy of science. Silly me for attempting to engage in civil discourse.

If you're here at Technocrat to only read the opinions of degreed experts on any particular subject you're at the wrong community. I personally enjoy the exchange of ideas, including speculation, of just about everybody here. I especially bristle at the suggestion that anybody should be censored or sanctioned - proper debate is a fine tool for us to help each other better understand a subject.

Please avoid making yourself a hypocrite and avoid posting anything else on Technocrat unless you have a Ph.D or equivalent work experience in the subject. I'd be interested in hearing about your qualifications to speak to this issue as well - do you have a doctorate in philosophy with a focus on the philosophy of science or are you just an armchair philosopher?

I'd suggest you stick to safer locales, like Scientific American, or Nature, but recent studies have shown that up to half of studies report results that are ultimately disproven, so if you're looking for only *correct* ideas, it's probably better to stick to text books on 30-year-old science. Everything else is full of dangerous thinking. On second thought, forget it - those are often proven wrong too.

Nosema Ceranae: The culprit behind Colony Collapse Disorder?

Bhima

Fri Apr 27 10:28:13 -0700 2007

manage

I hear you and agree... sort of.

Knocking around ideas on Bruce's website is pretty harmless.

There are 6 guys in my office that raise bees as a hobby, this is a hot topic.