Wilson, I'm sure you meant all you wrote with the purest intention and
so I thank you, expecially for not going the ad hominem route. Yet,
your post is just so much philosophical ambiguity (with religious
overtures) to even address w/o sounding like the Grinch. So as for a
response, just take your pick from the link below. I think you got
the gist of a good many of them in that last.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Fin...oney_Detection


I think "Why" is really the heart of your question, yes? more
specifically why not err on the good side? one can even ask why ask
why when we know our side seeks the greater cause? A mini version of
the end justifies the means. Most here know of the study that says
over half of the population will not change their opinion, even in the
face of contridictory information, but that should never stop one from
seeking facts and well formed information. A valid argument can stand
on its own merits....... or not.

So again... the two articles show little to no proof that nicotine
pesticides caused CCD. also the timelines do not matchup. Pesticides
as a whole are a stressor for sure as cited in the many CCD
references (again, don't recall that Nicotone was one of the orginal
conspiracy theories, seems that just came up later as the dogpile got
bigger). So no one is saying pesticides are cool, but perpetuating
propaganda is not the correct option either. Both your previous link
as well as Phorbin's are a bit lacking in any merit to say Mysterious
Bee Die-Off (CCD) is caused by Bayer and others. I do have to say the
comments to them however were quite enlightening. Most likely
indicative of the intended audience. But in taking sides, one has to
be the enemy, right? That seems always to be the on the other side of
your beliefs.


I also thank you for your season greeting and your concern. Know I
have had many an epiphany, just probably not your version.
So a very joyous holiday season to you also Wilson.

Gunner

"As man is, so is his God. And thus is God oft strangely odd." Goethe