Mobile phones massacring honeybees?
Tech News
By Stevie Smith Apr 18, 2007, 14:31 GMT
Other features coming soon.
Talkback
page: 1 2
if people believe this, I have swamp land in Florida that would make a great investment for someone.
This problem would have shown up sooner if it was true, it may have some influence in some areas, but in other areas there has been no densification of cell towers or mobile users and this syndrome is happening there with the bees
I think what the study shows is bees navigation systems are sensitive to changes in electromagnetic radiation. I suspect the cyclical pattern in sunspot activity from the Sun and the changes this has on the Earth's magnetic field as a result of the sunspot changes is probably the bigger culprit as some other researchers suggest in the media.
And your evidence for this is...?
You may be a legitimate investigator with hard data, I don't know.
The data regading cell phone radiation may be compelling also. I don't know.
But if you are just opining and offering up pet theories based on poorly-understood snippets of pop science journalism, then you are a buffoon, a bombast, or to put it more plainly, you are speaking out of the wrong orifice.
(I'm hoping these expletives fall on the right side of the moderators...)
It's much better when evidence is used to support an allegation, and scientists with actual credentials are consulted rather than a guy in a lab coat who swears he's a licensed scientitian.
The cell phone theory seems particularly wrong for two reasons:
1) Cell phones weren't invented this past winter.
2) The die off pattern doesn't follow the spread of cell phone technology.
The inevitable conclusion is that there is more evidence against the tie between cell phones and CCD than there is for it. It's an interesting idea to entertain, but the evidence doesn't support it.
I tink there is money to be made by dusting crops with pollen.
Well Tyler, I agree with you here...
> It's much better when evidence is used to support an allegation, and
> scientists with actual credentials are consulted rather than a guy in
> a lab coat who swears he's a licensed scientitian.
But then what's all this?
> The cell phone theory seems particularly wrong for two reasons:
>
> 1) Cell phones weren't invented this past winter.
> 2) The die off pattern doesn't follow the spread of cell phone technology.
>
> The inevitable conclusion is that there is more evidence against the
> tie between cell phones and CCD than there is for it. It's an interesting
> idea to entertain, but the evidence doesn't support it.
Just because an idea is implausible doesn't make it wrong. Two reasons you list are excellent reasons for approaching the actual data behind this news story with some health skepticism. But I haven't seen the actual studies. It is entirely possible that these two concerns have been addressed in some way by the authors of the study.
Most importantly, no 'inevitable conclusion' follows from reasons 1) and 2), and these reasons do not constitute evidence of any kind (apart from being evidence that you believe them to be true and convincing). Not only do they not constitute evidence, but the second claim, which would require evidence to support it, has none. It's all another case of 'alternative-orifice-speak' (alt-orifice).
Your suspicions are worth entertaining, and you may be right, but you kind of hurried to the close on this one. I hope our politicians don't come to snap conclusions like this when considering complex and important issues...
There must be an island or other area with no cell phone coverage that can be used as a control group.
This story is a speculation for now, and more research is needed.
>>It's much better when evidence is used to support an allegation, and >>scientists with actual credentials are consulted rather than a guy in a lab >>coat who swears he's a licensed scientitian.
and you know this from where? Quote source.
>>The cell phone theory seems particularly wrong for two reasons:
>>1) Cell phones weren't invented this past winter.
>>2) The die off pattern doesn't follow the spread of cell phone technology.
Common sence dictates: Cell phones have been growing in numbers, as the numbers grow, so does the density of emmissions from those cell phones. Therefore, any patterns would be based on the increase in density of cell phone sites and numbers of phones supported.
>>The inevitable conclusion is that there is more evidence against the tie >>between cell phones and CCD than there is for it. It's an interesting idea >>to entertain, but the evidence doesn't support it.
You have not offered any evidence, statisitical or otherwise, to have a conclusion.
HEY BLOWHEAD,
THE LOCAL REPORTS HERE FROM BEE KEEPERS THAT LIVE ON RELATIVELY ISOLATED GULF ISLANDS IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST IS THEIR BEE COLONIES ARE DOWN 50%.
NO CELL PHONE OR CELL TOWER TO BE FOUND WITHIN A 10 MILE RADIUS OF THEIR HIVES.
SO YOU FIGURE IT OUT GENIUS!
There was a bee and a hornet walking down the street. The bee was wearing a yarmulke; so the hornet asked him why. The bee's reply: 'I don't want to be known as a WASP.'
We Are ALL gonna DiE!!!!!!!!! The end of the world is happening because of our cell phones and those DAMN BlooDY BEe'S!!!!!!!
it's true that cell phones have been around for a long time, but the latest 3G technologies have not. it could very well be that this new use of spectrum could be causing problems that weren't seen previously.
Wow, I am flabbergasted that no one has suggested Al Gore's favourite, global warming. Or the use of SUVs. Could it be that perhaps we are going through a cycle? There have been many famines in history. Perhaps it is our turn. For now, cell phone use as the culprit is only in the theory stage. If it were true, what a massive shift would be needed in our social habits to thwart such a disastrous scenario. Let's hope this one doesn't pan out.
Wow, people are pretty sensitive about their cell phones! I agree we should be skeptical, but we should also be open to all the possibilies.
What if the link to bees and cancer is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, like the link between cigarettes and cancer, would people be willing to give up their phones? Would they support a government ban on cell towers? Somehow I doubt it — taking responsibility is not something our species does well.
I think the poster who suggested the future is aerial pollination may be on to something, if it comes down to a choice between bees and cell phones.
This story is aimed at those conspiracy theorists and those that beleive in aliens. They need some 'news' stories to keep them entertained.
It is sad that we have done so much wrong to the world. To think that technology does not effect the world around us, in bizare and unexpected ways would be niave. we should take a very close look at what we are doing and do all we can to minimize damage.
Odd news I ran a ham radio repeater station for years with both VHF and UHF transmitters right inside a farm land house with the bee's 20 feet away, 300 feet away is high power Manitoba Hydro lines, we all seemed to get along just fine. VE4ACV THe bee's kept coming back even when the bee keeper completely lost interest in his hobby.
Time lag on the prolification of cell phones and the bee problem notwithstanding, the most difficult fact to explain with the cell phone theory is the lack of predatory interest in an undefended hive. Predators stay away from what would be a very high value target. Why would cell phones do this? I could understand how they could, in theory, disrupt the bees, which I recall do use magnetic fields as one way to find their way around, but other critters don't work this way.
My bet would be on something like a virus. Something that a predator might be able to sense or which might somehow sully the honey.
My gosh you're blowing hard!
>> BEEMAN Apr 18th, 2007 - 20:04:47
>>
>> HEY BLOWHEAD,
>>
>> THE LOCAL REPORTS HERE FROM BEE KEEPERS THAT LIVE ON RELATIVELY
>> ISOLATED GULF ISLANDS IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST IS THEIR BEE COLONIES
>> ARE DOWN 50%.
>>
>> NO CELL PHONE OR CELL TOWER TO BE FOUND WITHIN A 10 MILE RADIUS OF THEIR
>> HIVES.
>>
>> SO YOU FIGURE IT OUT GENIUS!
First of all, this is an example of the 'Capslock Fallacy' or 'Argumentum ad Capslock'. Just because you type something in all uppercase letters does not make it any more true or convincing.
My whole point is that, based on a story like this, we have grounds to 'figure out' or conclude precisely nothing. Instead, we have reasons to learn more about the problem, always keeping our critical faculties activated.
Your claim about Pacific Northwest islands may be true, but would hardly rule out the cell phone hypothesis. What if there are two or more interacting causes? What if the cell phone hypothesis turns out to be too narrowly framed, and a larger class of communicative signals are involved?
I think any self-respecting genius in a case like this would not try to 'figure it out' based on a news story and some alternate-orifice theorising.
I read a while back about a British social commentator who mentioned that most people will always prefer religion to science because science requires us to accept a great deal of uncertainty. In fact, there is ultimately no certainty in science, only doubt, and hence the freedom to question. People don't like that. Once a doubt, question or uncertainty is raised, they want the issue settled and concluded in their minds right away.
Hence religion, and hence Cliff-Clavinesque armchair pseudoscientific 'conclusions' based on nothing but the desire to speak in the authoritative/knowledgable mode.
Clearly if radiation produced by mobile phones are destroying the navigational skills of the honeybees the population of this planet, the people of the planet have only a few years before 85% of the food supply is gone.
The messages posted here are an example of the ignorance about this devastating world problem. Talk about trap door minds slammed shut. It's frightening! Studies have shown brain cells are damaged by the transmission.
You want to bet the honey bees will disappear before the majority of the annoying mobile phone users abandon their useless toys.
How ridiculous! Some families have 4 or more mobile phones and log 3 hours or more per day. Therefore will never again find an opening between hives and the orchard vegetable flowers.
Wake up and smell the ...
Larry
Is there any data regarding bee populations and the previous solar maximum in 1958?
There is no doubt that man is contributing to global warming but I do believe that the bulk of it is due to solar conditions.
We live and die by the whims of the sun.
page: 1 2
Similar articles
- Drivers face 2-year sentence for in-car cell phone and MP3 use
- Brits send 1 billion text messages per week
- Ofcom reveals plan to allow mobile phone calls aboard jetliners
- Germany warns against Wi-Fi
- Mobile phones potentially dangerous in hospitals
Latest Headlines in Tech
- 1. Windows 7: Tips and tricks
- 2. Solo or parallel: Installing Windows 7 on your computer
- 3. UN approves universal mobile phone charger
- 4. Shifting from XP to Windows 7
- 5. Beta versions help firms work out kinks, but approach with caution
USA
Your Talkback on this Story