The Bee-pocalypse Was Another Climate Change False Alarm

[Jack Hays]

Yet another false attribution of a problem to climate change bites the dust. There's probably a Ph.D. dissertation waiting to be written about the life cycle of spurious alarmist claims about this or that alleged looming catastrophe blamed on climate change.

Climate News
Bee-pocaclypse called off, bees doing OK, global warming was never a cause

Back in 2007, Wired Magazine mused:

It’s only slightly less ridiculous than the other bee killing theory that year – cell phones.

It’s only slightly less ridiculous than the other bee killing theory that year – cell phones.
I published a story about the loony idea that was proposed by some researcher in Europe about “cell phone radiation may be killing bees”. I pointed out that it was garbage then, as it is now.
In 2012, I published a post saying global warming is off the hook for the issue, due to the discovery of a phorid fly parasite that had been spreading through colonies due in part to the commercial trucking of bees on demand.
Now in a new set of data from USDA, publicized in a story from the Washington Post today, it turns out bee colonies are now at a 20 year high, and that beekeepers have basically solved the problem on their own. . . .

 

[Deuce]

So, some random ass magazine in 2007 speculated about bees and you felt the need to talk about this why?

Did you read the Wired article?

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Yet another false attribution of a problem to climate change bites the dust. There's probably a Ph.D. dissertation waiting to be written about the life cycle of spurious alarmist claims about this or that alleged looming catastrophe blamed on climate change.


Back in 2007, Wired Magazine mused:

It’s only slightly less ridiculous than the other bee killing theory that year – cell phones.

It’s only slightly less ridiculous than the other bee killing theory that year – cell phones.
I published a story about the loony idea that was proposed by some researcher in Europe about “cell phone radiation may be killing bees”. I pointed out that it was garbage then, as it is now.
In 2012, I published a post saying global warming is off the hook for the issue, due to the discovery of a phorid fly parasite that had been spreading through colonies due in part to the commercial trucking of bees on demand.
Now in a new set of data from USDA, publicized in a story from the Washington Post today, it turns out bee colonies are now at a 20 year high, and that beekeepers have basically solved the problem on their own. . . .

The astounding amount of false claims by the left/environmental activists inflict upon us just keep hurting us, doesn't it? So much time wasted discussing silliness that they foist through fear mongering that always turns out to be false and they go on to the next thing. Short list: Alar scare, Nuclear Energy scare, running out of natural resources scare, global cooling then global warming now climate change scares, Ozone hole scare, overpopulation scare, mass starvation/famines scare, DDT scare...

 

[MrT]

The concern with the bees dying off has never been a concern for bee-keepers, but rather for bees in the wild. And bees in the wild are still facing a significant problem. If you are truly concerned about the health of the species (I know you are only using this article as a pseudo-strawman in an attempt to further affirm your own belief that global warming is false), then you should concern yourself with the species in the wild. Consider these two articles if you actually want more information on this relevant and concerning issue.

Patterns of widespread decline in North American bumble bees
Bees in freefall as study shows sharp US decline | Environment | The Guardian

On a side note, the threat to honeybees is still largely mysterious, but your lone link to one source that posited climate change as a possible cause is not indicative of the most popular theories. For that, I would point to pesticides containing neonicotinoids, Monoculture + migratory beekeeping + decreased biodiversity in commercial colonies.

https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/3g5ph8/us_honeybee_colonies_hit_a_20year_high/ctvn8ve

 

[MrT]

The astounding amount of false claims by the left/environmental activists inflict upon us just keep hurting us, doesn't it? So much time wasted discussing silliness that they foist through fear mongering that always turns out to be false and they go on to the next thing. Short list: Alar scare, Nuclear Energy scare, running out of natural resources scare, global cooling then global warming now climate change scares, Ozone hole scare, overpopulation scare, mass starvation/famines scare, DDT scare...

Yea...that fear of acid rain (and the subsequent tax credits offered to reduce sulfur dioxide), that fear of extinction to several bird species (and the subsequent dramatic reductions of DDTs), that fear of the hole in the ozone (and the subsequent dramatic reduction of CFCs), and that fear of rivers on fire (and the subsequent development and involvement of the EPA) has hurt us soooo bad.

/sarcasm

 

[Goshin]

I have a friend who has been a beekeeper for many years. We've been talking about the disappearance of bee colonies for a long time, and it is no trivial thing.


In particular, wild be colonies (non-human-managed) have been almost nonexistent for quite some time. Conditions have gotten so that bees require human aid to survive.


Climate change was something she never mentioned as a credible cause. Many theories were floated, that was just one of them.

The cell phone theory had to do with the way bees navigate, possibly using EM cues.


Most of the most prevalent theories involved either reactions to pesticides or to parasitic infestations.



While it is true that HEROIC efforts by beekeepers have managed to preserve the bee population thus far, the lack of wild populations is still a concern TMK.


while the fly parasite is an issue it remains uncertain to many keepers what the primary causal agent is.

 

[Jack Hays]

The concern with the bees dying off has never been a concern for bee-keepers, but rather for bees in the wild. And bees in the wild are still facing a significant problem. If you are truly concerned about the health of the species (I know you are only using this article as a pseudo-strawman in an attempt to further affirm your own belief that global warming is false), then you should concern yourself with the species in the wild. Consider these two articles if you actually want more information on this relevant and concerning issue.

Patterns of widespread decline in North American bumble bees
Bees in freefall as study shows sharp US decline | Environment | The Guardian

On a side note, the threat to honeybees is still largely mysterious, but your lone link to one source that posited climate change as a possible cause is not indicative of the most popular theories. For that, I would point to pesticides containing neonicotinoids, Monoculture + migratory beekeeping + decreased biodiversity in commercial colonies.

https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/3g5ph8/us_honeybee_colonies_hit_a_20year_high/ctvn8ve

Sorry, but one link from 2011 and another from 2010 suggest that you're still sipping the obsolete alarmist kool-aid.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Yea...that fear of acid rain (and the subsequent tax credits offered to reduce sulfur dioxide), that fear of extinction to several bird species (and the subsequent dramatic reductions of DDTs), that fear of the hole in the ozone (and the subsequent dramatic reduction of CFCs), and that fear of rivers on fire (and the subsequent development and involvement of the EPA) has hurt us soooo bad.

/sarcasm

Oh yeah, thanks,

I guess I had left that one out the fake acid rain scare Forbes Welcome

Yes, the fear-mongering that DDT would oh so so bad things, but the nonuse of this wonder chemical, that cleared up a lot of our malaria and mosquito borne diseases in the US and wherever else it was used, ended up because of your side's fear-mongering, to be banned almost worldwide. The continents of Africa and Asia have specifically borne the brunt of that fatal decision and since its ban the estimates run into the tens of millions dying from malaria DDT Controversy mostly in Africa. Malaria kills almost a million people annually. Countries that could afford to sidestep the ban ,for example Mexico and Ecuador, have malaria death rates that are nearly zero.

The ominous Ozone hole, has presented no real problems and yes, at great expense we cut down on CFCs. The science and fear-mongering regarding that was in no way verified due to our inability to establish a long term trend based on so little time to study the problem, wherein you have to eliminate large natural variations like the 11 year sunspot cycle a nearly impossible task given the shortness of the record. So one really cannot establish the global ozone layer is going through a steadily decreasing trend.

Oh and yeah, the famous Cuyahaga River fire that sparked the environmental movement...guess what, first fire, that we know, of started on the river in guess what year? 1968? 1960? No and no. 1973? No. 1868? Yes.

Fear-mongering is one of the primary skilled trades employed by the leftist, liberals and Democrats in the US.

Ever tire of being on the wrong side of the debate?

 

[Deuce]

The astounding amount of false claims by the left/environmental activists inflict upon us just keep hurting us, doesn't it? So much time wasted discussing silliness that they foist through fear mongering that always turns out to be false and they go on to the next thing. Short list: Alar scare, Nuclear Energy scare, running out of natural resources scare, global cooling then global warming now climate change scares, Ozone hole scare, overpopulation scare, mass starvation/famines scare, DDT scare...

It wasn't a "false claim."

It was some dude making a guess and a standard-issue clickbait headline.

 

[Deuce]

Sorry, but one link from 2011 and another from 2010 suggest that you're still sipping the obsolete alarmist kool-aid.

Says the guy discussing one three paragraph bit from 2007.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

It wasn't a "false claim."

It was some dude making a guess and a standard-issue clickbait headline.

It? It? What the sweet Jesus are you talking about brother. They dont charge you by the typed letter here, try to have a bit more clarity in what it is your are trying to say, please.

 

[Jack Hays]

Says the guy discussing one three paragraph bit from 2007.

The story is dated 23 July 2015.

 

[ocean515]

Says the guy discussing one three paragraph bit from 2007.

LOL

Geeze Deuce, you don't set need to set off fireworks to bring attention to your closed mind.

Had you not spasmodically responded, you would have noticed the article was from 2015, and the 2007 was a graphic containing the article being commented on.

 

[Deuce]

The story is dated 23 July 2015.

No. The Wired article was from 2007.

LOL

Geeze Deuce, you don't set need to set off fireworks to bring attention to your closed mind.

Had you not spasmodically responded, you would have noticed the article was from 2015, and the 2007 was a graphic containing the article being commented on.

That's the article I'm referring to. This whole bit about ROFL CLIMATE ALARMISM is based on a singular article from a tech magazine in 2007 wildly speculating on bees, and admitting outright that it's speculation. The only thing Jack Hays has to base his claim of alarmism is one link from 2007.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

What's everyone bitching about in here?

There was a bee problem.
Apiarists addressed it.
They have managed to counteract the effects - once they knew what was going on and devised a means of addressing it.

I'm sure there's also a much better source for deeper information - because beekeepers don't just hang out alone. There's likely a professional community or organization that they're all involved in.

 

[Deuce]

What's everyone bitching about in here?

There was a bee problem.
Apiarists addressed it.
They have managed to counteract the effects - once they knew what was going on and devised a means of addressing it.

I'm sure there's also a much better source for deeper information - because beekeepers don't just hang out alone. There's likely a professional community or organization that they're all involved in.

Well, some random journalist guessed that the weather impacted bee food supplies, which in turn made them more vulnerable to disease or parasites. One guy made that guess in 2007. Wrote like, a whole paragraph about it. Clearly a vast liberal conspiracy to cause mass panic is at play. Silly alarmists.

 

[Jack Hays]

No. The Wired article was from 2007.




That's the article I'm referring to. This whole bit about ROFL CLIMATE ALARMISM is based on a singular article from a tech magazine in 2007 wildly speculating on bees, and admitting outright that it's speculation. The only thing Jack Hays has to base his claim of alarmism is one link from 2007.

It was representative of a wave of alarmist nonsense. Here's another example.

[h=3]Climate change: Impact on honey bee populations and ...[/h]https://www.researchgate.net/.../23285587_Climate_change_I...ResearchGate


Official Full-Text Publication: Climate change: Impact on honey bee ... for some species, habitat loss has led to population declines (NRC 2007; Potts et al. 2010) ...

 

[Threegoofs]

It was representative of a wave of alarmist nonsense. Here's another example.

[h=3]Climate change: Impact on honey bee populations and ...[/h]https://www.researchgate.net/.../23285587_Climate_change_I...ResearchGate


Official Full-Text Publication: Climate change: Impact on honey bee ... for some species, habitat loss has led to population declines (NRC 2007; Potts et al. 2010) ...

Yes. It's just crazy that someone would write a paper exploring the potential significant consequences for bees in response to the well known phenomenon of climate change!

Those crazy alarmists! Thinking of everything!

I mean, just look at the insane description of the contents:

"In this article, the authors examine the potential impact of climate change on honey bee behaviour, physiology and distribution, as well as on the evolution of the honey bee's interaction with diseases."

 

[Jack Hays]

Yes. It's just crazy that someone would write a paper exploring the potential significant consequences for bees in response to the well known phenomenon of climate change!

Those crazy alarmists! Thinking of everything!

I mean, just look at the insane description of the contents:

"In this article, the authors examine the potential impact of climate change on honey bee behaviour, physiology and distribution, as well as on the evolution of the honey bee's interaction with diseases."

Just another false alarm.

 

[Deuce]

It was representative of a wave of alarmist nonsense. Here's another example.

Climate change: Impact on honey bee populations and ...


Official Full-Text Publication: Climate change: Impact on honey bee ... for some species, habitat loss has led to population declines (NRC 2007; Potts et al. 2010) ...

Which ****ing part of this strikes you as alarmist in any way? did you read it!? You know they're talking about these parasites, right?

(second link nonfunctional)

 

[Deuce]

Just another false alarm.

What part was false? Significant effort had to be made to maintain commercial bee populations.

 

[Jack Hays]

Which ****ing part of this strikes you as alarmist in any way? did you read it!? You know they're talking about these parasites, right?

(second link nonfunctional)

The bees were not and are not in danger.

 

[Jack Hays]

What part was false? Significant effort had to be made to maintain commercial bee populations.

Sure.

 

[lb_on_teh_cb]

What part was false? Significant effort had to be made to maintain commercial bee populations.

thats what i heard too.

The bees were not and are not in danger.

ok boss

 

[thenotorious]

Yet another false attribution of a problem to climate change bites the dust. There's probably a Ph.D. dissertation waiting to be written about the life cycle of spurious alarmist claims about this or that alleged looming catastrophe blamed on climate change.

Climate News
Bee-pocaclypse called off, bees doing OK, global warming was never a cause

Back in 2007, Wired Magazine mused:

It’s only slightly less ridiculous than the other bee killing theory that year – cell phones.

It’s only slightly less ridiculous than the other bee killing theory that year – cell phones.
I published a story about the loony idea that was proposed by some researcher in Europe about “cell phone radiation may be killing bees”. I pointed out that it was garbage then, as it is now.
In 2012, I published a post saying global warming is off the hook for the issue, due to the discovery of a phorid fly parasite that had been spreading through colonies due in part to the commercial trucking of bees on demand.
Now in a new set of data from USDA, publicized in a story from the Washington Post today, it turns out bee colonies are now at a 20 year high, and that beekeepers have basically solved the problem on their own. . . .

I find it very difficult to comprehend how somebody can't find global warming as factual considering 99% of scientists support it. I mean greenhouse gasses is like middle-school science stuff, yet somehow people such as yourself rather be convinced it's a leftist conspiracy by big oil like the 1% of scientists who've actually been paid off to support it.

I just can't see why though. What possibly do environmentalists have to gain by falsifying this? Surely by not, they are stopping hazardous emissions, which is an advantage to you as much as anybody

It's a plague to the mind, but reading over your other stuff you also seem to think oil is limitless, so at the very least it's unsurprising.