Sigh.Please provide proof of the above assertion.
My local bees would prove you totally wrong. But maybe I just imagined the following and the stings
But of course if you know my local bees better than me, I bow to your superior knowledge.
Did you miss the "IMHO" in my original post, or are you just being argumentative? The "O" stands for "opinion", not assertion. The "H" stands for "humble". It's a belief based on long experience of observing a almost complete lack of difference (on average) between bees I have collected as swarms (mostly from tree colonies), and bees I have bought, or split from existing colonies.
Certainly I have noticed no difference in aggression.
You had some bees follow you. Fine. Is that "proof" that "wild" bees are more aggressive than managed colonies?
None of us has "proof". This is beekeeping, not maths. We have experience.
But an addition to my personal experience my logic is that, based on the extensive interchange of bees (and genes, via open mating) between managed and non-managed locations, it seems implausible that there is a significant difference, on average, between the characteristics of these two populations nationwide. It would be like discovering a significant genetic difference between people living in Manchester and Liverpool, despite the fact that people move between those two cities all the time and have done for hundreds of years. If I alleged that there was no significant difference between these two groups of people, would you demand I proved it scientifically? Or would the burden of proof be the other way round?