The title of the honeybee article as well as its tone seem to suggest that the author has concluded that the disappearance of the honeybee from North America is unimportant and trivial.

I fully expect to witness this attitude applied to every extinction that occurs, right up until the moment that people realize humans are next. Come on, be serious - where else is this going except faster and faster towards the demise of our OWN species?

Yes,

I agree. The article totally neglects the beauty of the honey bee -- the bees incredible efficiency and helpfulness and symmetry of the bees and their world.

I've concluded the writer is trivial and unimportant. More bees, fewer self absorbed snobs.

I agree with your comment about the tone of the article. I would also like to mention that Rudolf Steiner spoke about the demise of bees in his 1923 lectures. He considered that artifical breeding would lead to the down fall of bees - especially with regards to the queen bee. Steiner, R, (1998) BEES. Barrington, MA: Anthroposophic Press. I am a would be Bee Keeper. Love bees.

YES WE ARE HEADING TO OUR OWN DEMISE AND ANYONE WHO DOES NOT SEE THIS HAS THEIR HEAD IN THE SAND. THANKFULLY THERE ARE ENOUGH PEOPLE THAT ARE AWARE AND WILL WORK TOWARD SAVING OUR RESOURSES AND ENVIRONMENT.

Thus the entire world is not at large risk. A rather large INDUSTRY might be--but that is another issue. The European bee was introduced here and is not more native to this continent than Chinese chopsticks. Its loss is disappointing but not the end of life on the planet. Hyperbolic yick yack about species loss up to and including humans misses some vital issues not shown in the above posts. First and foremost is the problem of extrapolation. This is like saying that since babies grow at X-rate of nutrition intake therefore by age 70 we'll all weigh 50 tons. Obviously nature has other plans for growth and limits to growth. Else our diet problems would be a heck of a lot worse than they actually are. Second, the loss of non-native species is not in itself deleterious to the environment. Only a disapointment, the latter of which is an emotional issue. Third, humans--contra the nutcases like Paul Erlich and other doomsayers who're not even correct in the same manner that a stopped clock is correct twice a day--have more resiliancy than any other species on the planet and have managed to go beyond the alleged limits to sustenance.

Take two honey teas and call a real entomologist in the morning.

Okay then, if it's fine that they disappear because they're not native to the North American continent then why not get rid of all of the other things, including plants and animals that aren't native to this continent... including most of us.

This is not a natural die-off such as the previous incidents. Please, just as you ask others to research, you may want to do as much yourself.

Wakefield,

Are you suggesting that humans are somehow exempt from extinction? "Resiliency," as you put it, can't keep humans alive if every other species goes extinct. I'm not suggesting that we are on the brink of such an occurrence, only that taking the disappearance of species lightly is foolish and shortsighted.

I'd point out that the real "hyperbolic yick-yack" here is you saying that humans are more resilient than any other species on the planet. I'm interested in hearing some empirical evidence to support such a claim - which is highly subjective, at best. Resilient or not, humans are dependent on biodiversity. We are not necessarily dependent on the honeybee, but we do depend on a diverse biosphere. Humankind is not an island. Writing off a species in the way that you and the article's author have done makes little sense, and betrays a fundamental misunderstanding about our place in the world.

Read the article again, then perhaps do some research. The honeybee is not native to North America. "Wild" honeybees are actually feral. Therefore, their extinction, while unfortunate for us and for the bees, is not necessarily a bad thing. They were not meant to be on this continent.

I'm with you all. I was appalled at the light tone of the story. Apparently she doesn't realize what the honey bee means to us. Writing about something that could mean the extinction of the human race with humor is not cool. I cross-referenced the story in the New York Times, and believe me, there was NO humor in that story.

I do not like the idea that someone could think that honeybees are not important. Everything was created with a purpose. If people start disregarding little things it will eventual end up that everything is disregarded no matter how big are little. I would like my sons to know what a honeybee is. I am not a big enviormentalist by any means but we should try to perserve our nature none the less. Not destroy it just because we can.

Yes I agree. This author should not be commenting on scientific occurrences if she is just going to make a mockery of them. Ha ha, it's so hilarious that a whole species of (important) insects are going extinct because of our contempt to respect the earth. She attempts to misdirect our attention by laughing at "aliens" as a cause and completely ignores the real causes that we can change. Stupid ignorant...person.

Yeah, I want my horse and buggy back on the road. The honeybees, although not trivial at all, are the least of our worries.

Hey, we did the Ice Age didn't we?

No. The dinosaurs did. By the way, the entire world isn't glucose dependent, but we ALL are vegetable dependent.