On Jan 5, 9:45 am, Wilson wrote:

Thanks Gunner.

You’re welcome Wilson If this is of a real interest I will continue
to give info as I find it, if not do let me know. Just know I do not
find any real evidence that CCD is/was caused by Bayer Crop Science,
yet we both know neither will be convinced otherwise. I still maintain
there is & has been more than one cause in play as I have outlined
before and we need to find and fix one, but preferably both. We need
to dispense with mythologies, hidden agendas and falsehoods in order
to move forward. I got some xtra time today to wax so without too
much philosophical lecture and debate....

The idea of a bumblebee being inbred sounds like a result of
population decline as opposed to being the source of the decline.

That is the unknown Cameron seeks reason for and her call for more
studies. With such short lifecycles perhaps we will see the
evolutionary outcome in our life, particularly with the
"Africanization" of the honey bee (The AHB) here in the Western
World. It amazes me that people clamoring about the ecological
contamination and protection of species do not know that the honey
bee is a non native species in the US, or much about the Darwinian
hybridization of the AHB. They are the most fittest to survive.
Perhaps a good thing for the preservation of the honey bee, maybe not
so much for those few humans attacked or killed by them so there is
the trade-off. should we kill off the pesticides, the pathogen or
just build a better bee?

All creatures would inbreed if their numbers declined too much as a mechanism of
survival.

Yes, there are instances of that theory in history, yet territory
expansion and evolutionary cross breeding are more prevalent outcomes
in nature. Regardless, her point is to what extent and what outcome
is the loss of this important pollinator, the bumble bee?

"As with honeybees, a pathogen is partly involved" yet the article doesn't
mention the pathogen specifically. It does use the singular and not the
plural, pathogens, indicating an oversight or somebody has a specific poison
in mind.

A semantically narrow interpretative view perhaps. I read that
passage as "a"... one...in a list of many such pathogens. In peer
reviewed material going back scores of years there is antidotal as
well as documented evidence of many different pathogens related to the
many different species observed in CCD events. Now specifically for
the Bumble Bee study, she absolutely lists the pathogen she found,
Nosema bombi and evidence of another stressor, the inbreeding. Two (2)
causative elements as was reported in the UC/US Army study. You find
not only Nosema, but Vorra; viruses like APV, & IAPV; the many brood
diseases such as SAC, Chalk, Purple, Stone; parasites such as B.
Coeca, Tracheal, etc. found to have infected many hives and many
species, to say “a” single pathogen is responsible. The same goes for
pesticides, yet not given in many of these accusations, such as
Phorbin’s, is dosage and application being used or most likely;
misused. Another strange fact not discussed is why did it take 5
years to kill off the German bees with neonicotinoids, 2003
(introduction) to 2008 (kill-off) banning?.

So again note, there has been identified many different pathogens
from the many different CCD studies, as well as many different types
of pesticides, singularly and in combination with each other, found
in the many kills throughout the many years. There remains to date
no commonality link in these “many” occurrences for one to
arbitrarily assign blame to Bayer. So despite the great desire to
stick it to the evil corporation and Bayer in particuliar, I have to
say there is no evidence to support that theory. I would hazard the
guess that this is a hopeful myth and one of many counter measures
being used to fight the GMO movement.

Go back to the UC/US Army study of 2010 in our last thread. What was
unique in that study was the forensic methodology was as an important
factor as the actual find. I believe it explained why it was not
confirmed beforehand and highlights the state of the art in biological
detection we have now since the WOT. The finding in that specific
case was that it is a combination of two elements, hence the "a
pathogen is partly involved" statement.

Until we get the chance again Wilson, Stay warm and dry