As John pointed out when he covered this earlier, “no honeybees and we don’t eat”. If it is true that cell phones disrupt bee activity, can we change things enough to make a difference? Will the industry allow any change?
They are putting forward the theory that radiation given off by mobile phones and other hi-tech gadgets is a possible answer to one of the more bizarre mysteries ever to happen in the natural world – the abrupt disappearance of the bees that pollinate crops.
Late last week, some bee-keepers claimed that the phenomenon – which started in the US, then spread to continental Europe – was beginning to hit Britain as well.
The theory is that radiation from mobile phones interferes with bees’ navigation systems, preventing the famously homeloving species from finding their way back to their hives. Improbable as it may seem, there is now evidence to back this up.
Now a limited study at Landau University has found that bees refuse to return to their hives when mobile phones are placed nearby. Dr Jochen Kuhn, who carried it out, said this could provide a “hint” to a possible cause.
If this turns out to be true we’d better do something about it, as anyone would argue that we kinda need bees. Is there any research on the spread of the bee-colony-death phenomena and how it relates to cell phone coverage and radio signal density?
Doesn’t seem odd that this all surfaced around the time
Howard Stern left commercial radio and went to satellite.
Seeing that satellite reaches areas his commercial broadcast could not
do you think this would have an effect??
Another article claimed that the insects that normally scavenge the honey from a dead hive refused to go near the hive. IIRC and if the claim is accurate, the problem is more likely something the bees gather in small quantities and makes it’s self known when concentrated.
Those who want to blame cell phones have some proving to do.
Proof is in the eye of the proofee. Look at all the ever existent holocaust deniers out there. You can blatantly prove something and still have jerks shoot imaginary holes in your proof.
You can lead a brain to knowledge, you just can’t make the person think!
Time to start harvesting those aphids that ants “tend” to get psuedo-honey.
btw, this story is complete crap. Its industrial pollution that is killing stuff all over the globe – good luck attacking an entrenched & fairly economically stable industry (that we basically need to survive now).
its high problability of being a combination of things but all the ones I will mention are man made problems with disregards to consiquences. These things we can change! WE must do so and now. Or we will go exstinct if the eco system falls apart which it is currently doing
1. wireless communication which involves radio frequencies and radiation or electromegnetic fields, accumulitive effect
2. excessive electrical power lines that act as big gigantuan electro magnets ( and individual line may not matter, its the “acumulitive effect” that counts and the effect is being proven by the weakening of the earth electromagnetic field, which is being recorded as we speak by so pecial dedicated scientists) the way to put into visual perspective the comon person can understand is take a CRT type monitor that uses a megnetic field to function properly and hold small normal magnets up to it then add more and more to the screen , to simulate societies use of energy especially the electricity kind clump the magnets as the greatest consintration of high technology for example N America, Eroupe notice how the distortion is affected where the three fields connect especially where the three fields start to separate. In other words all of the power lines criscrossing the country is acting like one big super electro magnet.
a weaker magnetic field around earth alows more uv , radiation and who knows what else through that hits earth.
3. destruction of habitat to meet HUMANS NEEDS and WANTS ONLY sprawling suburbs, conversion of farmable land to properties for corperate and huge homes. draining wetlands or cutting down forests or clearing meadows in persuit of excessive luxury or to drive and create a unsastainable consumer market for things we cannot sustain enviormentally and ecologically
4. destroying anything and everything that humans deem a nuicense , insects, animal, plants big and small, land formations we deem unfit for humans (wetlands and water overflow flood plains which naturally occurr in rain seasons by the way by doing this water runs off to the ocean before it has a chance to filter down into the underground water supply less water to go around)
5. genetic crop modification (plants been evoving for millions of years for a reason to balance the eco system) WE ARE PLAYING ” GOD (creator of life)” with little to no understanding of the effect it will have to the enviorment and eco system as a whole. example creating plants with insecticides built into the dna insecticides kills indescriminantly not just insects (which we deemed good or bad)but also the animals that eat them as well by acumulitive effect of poison or lack of food to go around.
6. insecticides , hurbicides indiscriminatly kills period! no matter how much the company that made it said it was safe accumulitive affect is especially true here if product is poison in consintration in the container it will be poison when accumulated in the enviormental run off.
7. corperate capitalism which is make a product and induce an artificial demand for products by providing it by lower cost than things we already use and therefore do not need new product. Or creating products that intentionally made cheap with short lifespans to make you buy it more because it breaks. example 20 dollar coffee maker lasts average 6 months in 10 years you buy 20 coffee makers cost you 400$
It also wastes energy, to make those 20 coffee makers compared to making one that lasts 10 years. For that one it may cost 150$-250$ to get one coffee maker that last 10 years and maybe 1/10th of the total energy to produce it compared to the accumulitive energy to produce the 20 coffee makers. {{ The point that I am trying to make is the 80 percent polution reduction has to come from reduction of energy consumption. we reduce consumption and we naturally reduce emmisions}}
Check out the last sentence of this statement:
” The United States Congressional record deals with the use of HAARP for penetrating the earth with signals bounced off of the ionosphere. These signals are used to look inside the planet to a depth of many kilometers in order to locate underground munitions, minerals and tunnels. The U.S. Senate set aside $15 million dollars in 1996 to develop this ability alone — earth-penetrating-tomography. The problem is that the frequency needed for earth-penetrating radiation is within the frequency range most cited for disruption of human mental functions. It may also have profound effects on migration patterns of fish and wild animals which rely on an undisturbed energy field to find their routes.”
Are BEES such a creature?
If cell phones are the cause that is a horrifying thought because i doubt that everyone is gunna give up their cell. I would, but a lot of people would say “eh screw the bees,” and leave it at that. But bees are one of the most important animals!
i think that scientists should do some more research on this issue before they can be sure, but i also think that the shrinking bee population could be caused by, hmm, i dunno, maybe GLOBAL WARMING? if you wanna save some bees just polute less :]]
What about chemtrails? I googled “chemtrails” and “light blocked” or “sun block” after I saw comment 3 above saying bees navigate by polarized light, not magnetics, and came upon this:
http://www.willthomas.net/Chemtrails/Articles/Chemtrails_In_US_Schools.htm
Apparently the light reaching earth has been going down annually and after chemtrails, which have been reported in the US and all around the world, the light is dramatically lessened.
It’s obvious.
Bees are social insects.
Cell phones are used in public by rude people.
Naturally, the bees don’t want to be associated with such unsocial behavior so they go elsewhere.
Bravo Bees! Down with bad cell phone behaviour by humans!
I just spoke with a guy who is new at our company, but used to work with Sprint and Nextel as a cell site engineer. His experience was that every three weeks or so when performing normal maintenance on the sites, they would have a major accumulation of bees on or near the antennas. His observations were that the bees appeared to be attracted to the sites, but would have a difficult time leaving (of course, how could anyone prove this either way). He mentioned that they would call out exterminators to the sites before visits because the bees were so high in density. Finally, he also mentioned that the PG&E engineers had the same issues with their power stations.
Well in the last 4 1/2 billion years there have been many mass extinctions from many natual causes. Every few milion years changes in many different factors can alter dominance or can change any of the predoinant links that effect the whole chain. I think we are a big link in the chain of life and what we do has its consiquences. Cell phone most deffinatly play a role in the demise of the honey bee, one of the most important links in the chain. Isn’t the question, “Should we stop using cell phone for the Bees sake”? With the answer beeing a deffinate “YES” I would say stop all of the brodcasting on land and in space and see if it makes any difference. I don’t have a cell phone but I know peopl who do and I don’t think they will give them up, willingly.
Well in the last 4 1/2 billion years there have been many mass extinctions from many natual causes. Every few milion years changes in many different factors can alter dominance or can change any of the predoinant links that effect the whole chain. I think we are a big link in the chain of life and what we do has its consiquences. Cell phone most deffinatly play a role in the demise of the honey bee, one of the most important links in the chain. Isn’t the question, “Should we stop using cell phone for the Bees sake”? With the answer beeing a deffinate “YES” I would say stop all of the brodcasting on land and in space and see if it makes any difference. I don’t have a cell phone but I know people who do and I don’t think they will give them up, willingly.
To All Of Mankind ~ Important Message ~
We Better Start getting Serious ~
” To Save our Planet !
is to Save the Honeybee’s ~
Like many other phenomena, the disappearance of bees is probably due a variety of factors. However, i question the safety of cellphones in general and would not dismiss the EMF being emitted by them so quickly as one of the culprits
In general, i think there are too many who might be in denial about cellphones posing any danger to our species or any other simply because so many people have become so dependent on the technology.
There is scientific evidence that the electromagnetic radiation emitted by these phone can interfere with our bodies on a cellular level, with the possibility that down the road we may find an increase in cellphone related brain tumors, for example. In light of this possibility, it is particularly disturbing to see young kids talking on cell phone, since their bodies would in all likelihood be more vulnerable to the adverse consequences of close contact with the strong radiation that these instruments are emitting.
The scariest aspect of all, however, as far as i’m concerned, when it comes to the issue of cellphones, is that so many people assume that the technology has to be safe. I guess these same people assume that all the sugary cereals on store shelves are good for their kids. The fact is that corporate America often doesn’t give a damn about the health of consumers when they’re is so much money to be made from either lying about the products they produce or simply suppressing information about these products.
We know how corporations lie, they lie just like everyone else does. How do they suppress information about the dangers of their products. Could it be because they virtually own the mass media in this country? Hmmmm, I wonder…..
Perhaps the widening of markets across individual continents and linking those continents into the same supply chain (aka globalization) is to blame. If a microbe was brought to California from Asia or South America, and that microbe infected bees, and those very same bees were trucked across virtually the entire North American continent, it would follow that the spread of the microbe would be very rapid. This seems to be a standard practice of commercial beekeeping. The colonies are moved all over the continent to pollinate commercial crops. A spread across the Atlantic would be easily accomplished via commerce. There may well come a time when the ecological risks of global trade outweigh the perceived economic and convenience benefits.
I wonder what kind of cell phone (i.e. GSM, CDMA…) affects the bees to keep them away from their hive? Placing a cell phone near an unwanted hive say, in the wall of your house might be an inexpensive way to get rid of it.