AIDS denial is immoral

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by spuriousmonkey, Jan 2, 2007.

Page 8 of 34
  1. MetaKron

    MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    All they have to do is start with a little fertilizer, often of the variety found behind male bovines...
     
    MetaKron, Jan 6, 2007
    #141

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Sputnik

    Sputnik Banned Banned

    Messages:
    888

    The only hatchet job on Kary Mullis `s reputation , was done single handed by himself .......
    If you prefer another link :

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kary_Mullis

    Seems, that is was another norwegian scientist Kjell Kleppe, who first discovered the principles of PCR in 1969 - I must congratulate Kary Mullis , with managing to get the Nobel Prize for it ....

    Sometimes " great minds " can do so much for science ........

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2007
    Sputnik, Jan 6, 2007
    #142

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. MetaKron

    MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    They're really angry with Mullis for writing "Walking Through the Mine Field." Academics never could tolerate well-deserved criticism.
     
    MetaKron, Jan 6, 2007
    #143

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. leopold

    leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    to be honest, it sounds like typical research to me.

    you are proposing that the virus HIV doesn't cause AIDS?

    something causes AIDS, the lab results prove it.

    what if it's a process instead of a virus?
     
    leopold, Jan 6, 2007
    #144
  8. MetaKron

    MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    There is absolutely no real evidence that HIV causes AIDS. This is what they have ostracized Duesberg for telling everyone, that the official figures showed a poor correlation between alleged infection and the development of AIDS.

    There is a lot of evidence that other things cause immune deficiency. That should be called AIDS.

    What if it's a process instead of a virus? You know that story about how the same person who put the water in watermelon, and the butter in butterflies, put the fuck in strawberries? There's no "fuck" in strawberries? That's what I've been trying to tell you.

    As long as they insist on defining "AIDS" as an immune deficiency caused by HIV, which I think is deliberately braindead, there is no such thing as AIDS. If they define AIDS as immune defiency and define the indicators that tell us that there is actually an immune deficiency, then we have something to talk about. A condition of immune suppression can be and usually is temporary.
     
    MetaKron, Jan 6, 2007
    #145
  9. invert_nexus

    invert_nexus Ze do caixao Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,686
    Yeah.
    Temporary.
    Death being the usual end of the temporary immune challenged period of your life.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    invert_nexus, Jan 6, 2007
    #146
  10. Sputnik

    Sputnik Banned Banned

    Messages:
    888
    Ok - I found it :

    http://www.duesberg.com

    The cause of AIDS is : use of recreational drugs (including poppers) , malnutrition (especially in Africa), and medicine (especially medicine used against HIV virus) ....

    Does that mean , that if you do not do any drugs , take no medications and
    is not malnutritioned ..... then it is impossibel to get AIDS ?????
     
    Sputnik, Jan 6, 2007
    #147
  11. Sputnik

    Sputnik Banned Banned

    Messages:
    888
    Any findings of HIV virus in people is just an accidental harmless find ....
     
    Sputnik, Jan 6, 2007
    #148
  12. leopold

    leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    this also proves AIDS is caused by HIV
     
    leopold, Jan 6, 2007
    #149
  13. Sputnik

    Sputnik Banned Banned

    Messages:
    888
    Nice free ticket for not using a condom if you are HIV-positive

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Because HIV in itself is just a harmless accidental finding .....

    And oh dear - the wicked, wicked people cut any further funding to his
    scientific research .........

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2007
    Sputnik, Jan 6, 2007
    #150
  14. Sputnik

    Sputnik Banned Banned

    Messages:
    888

    Yes - you get AIDS indirectly from HIV - because you take the wicked, wicked medication ......

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Sputnik, Jan 6, 2007
    #151
  15. MetaKron

    MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    The best way to face a challenge to doctrine is to repeat doctrine back to the challenger.
     
    MetaKron, Jan 6, 2007
    #152
  16. Sputnik

    Sputnik Banned Banned

    Messages:
    888
    Warning and disclaimer : I admit, every quote here is taken out of context in the most brutal way .........

    Still , why do I get this feeling ............hhmmm........

    I now realise, that nothing I will ever say - will ever convince you Meta

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I hope you are well - take care of yourself ........

    I did not realise it untill now......

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please forgive me .............
     
    Sputnik, Jan 6, 2007
    #153
  17. MetaKron

    MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    You've also altered some of them. I distinctly remember saying that the subject was giving me ASS cancer, not plain cancer.
     
    MetaKron, Jan 6, 2007
    #154
  18. leopold

    leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    doesn't that itch?
     
    leopold, Jan 6, 2007
    #155
  19. Bells

    Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Which still does not explain how the millions in Africa somehow managed to get it, since their governments followed the same ideals as Meta does and denied HIV existed and that AIDS was a problem, and they never had access to HIV medication until only recently.

    So either all those people were on recreational drugs and suffered from severe malnutrition and were taking some other form of medication (

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ), or they had unprotected sex with other HIV sufferers, and then infected their partners and other people by having unprotected sex with them afterwards. But since HIV is a myth, the fact that they are HIV positive means that they were really healthy (since HIV does not exist and all) and they could have unprotected sex until they developed AIDS, caused by something else (apparently AIDS drugs which they never had access to). WOW! Talk about a convoluted conspiracy. But as they say, the devil is in the detail.

    Meta, if that is the basis of your argument, then I am through with you on this topic. Your belief that HIV is a myth is also followed by many, sadly many in power, which HAS resulted in the deaths of millions. You have all basically contributed to the death of virtually a whole generation. I hope that you never have a sexual partner who when they tell you they are HIV positive, you then proceed to have unprotected sex with them because you think it is a myth and think you are safe. And then you possibly go on to infect others because you think HIV does not exist.

    Ermm hate to burst your bubble there Baron, but salt, or excessive amounts of it, is a contributing factor in high blood pressure. I don't know where you thought it is a myth.

    Do you have proof of this myth? Links?

    And it is now been found to help in some cancer treatments.

    And it only took a few years to realise that it did cause birth defects. HIV and AIDS has been around for a hell of a long time and has been researched since it was first discovered. The denialists put forth their argument of the HIV myth in the early 90's and in the years since then, research has proven them wrong. Hence why it is quite telling that the articles relied upon by Meta date from the early to mid 90's and he has nothing from even the last couple of years to argue his point. Don't you think from the 90's that we have moved quite a long way?

    Hell, in the late 50's when Thalidamide was prescribed to women as a sedative and a morning sickness preventer, medical research and testing was no where near as stringent as it is now.

    HIV and AIDS is continually being researched because a cure has yet to be found. New medication is being developed to help people with HIV live with their disease. In the late 80's and 90's, being diagnosed with HIV was a death sentence. But now it is not seen as being the death sentence it once was as people can live with it and do (in the West that is where the medication is available). If we were to listen to Meta and his ilk, no one should take any HIV or AIDS medication as it is that that causes AIDS. Now imagine if we lived under a government like those in Africa where HIV was also seen to be a myth. Scary thought actually.

    And yes, new discoveries about HIV and AIDS will most probably be found. Diseases are researched constantly. HIV and AIDS is no different. It does not mean however that there is currently any indication that HIV does not cause AIDS or that HIV is a myth. Let me ask you a question Baron. If you meet some woman and just as you're getting into bed she tells you she's clean, other from a HIV infection which she thinks is a myth and she has refused all medical treatment. Would you have sex with her without a condom? Or would you think 'eh.. scientists make mistakes all the time'..?

    Salt is a contributing factor in high blood pressure Baron. Hence why if you are diagnosed with high blood pressure, your doctor will tell you to cut back the salt. Where in the hell did you hear that it is not?:bugeye:
     
    Bells, Jan 6, 2007
    #156
  20. MetaKron

    MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    It itches AND burns.

    When Duesberg tried to publish the facts about AIDS, that the statistics were being used badly, he was met with verbal abuse, rhetoric from Hell, and censorship. These were not the actions of an establishment that knew what it was doing. These came from a group that was hell-bent on suppressing any difference of opinion. Unfortunately that group had the support of some federal institutions.
     
    MetaKron, Jan 7, 2007
    #157
  21. MetaKron

    MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    If it were harmless, it might be funny as hell. They've talked their way around the lack of an accurate test. They've always talked as if a virus was isolated, even though the "co-discoverer" Luc Montaigne admitted that it was not. Considering that it was 21 years after the first claim that the virus was found to cause the disease, the 2004 example doesn't count for most of the time that this hoax has been going on.

    Get some authority figures to make up a story and those who usually suck up will do so, and take up the chant, and embellish it. The ones who started it can, like Richard Nixon and McCarthyism, come out looking pretty clean. But they are the really dirty ones because they're the ones who put them up to it.

    Are we really that shallow? The most verbally abusive, the most physically threatening, the least capable of expressing intelligent thought, impress us as knowing what they are doing? Someone who is able to lie with a straight face? Someone who tells us that the tests are reliable even though the manufacturer prints on the label the fact that there is no standard by which they can be calibrated? Someone who smothers the facts with abusive rhetoric? Someone who uses labels to dismiss facts? Who pretends to have some kind of magical microscope that lets them read out the genome of a specific particle, but they won't tell us where to find that microscope because the rest of us wouldn't know what to do with it?

    We're being bent over, right here and how.

    If Bell is through talking to me, does that mean that he's through spitting on me?
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2007
    MetaKron, Jan 7, 2007
    #158
  22. Tnerb

    Tnerb Banned Banned

    Messages:
    7,917
    Metakron can you tell me is it possible for you to reach a conclusion. Can you tell me and so everyone if it is possible to find evidence to your conclusion? Or if you think that it is possible.

    I believe strongly that the title to this thread is correct. AIDS denial is immoral. You can't deny aids without starting some sort of conflict in the least. By the way, I am taking the time to make a more choerent post than I ususally do, so be proud of that. at least.

    Are you denying the existence of aids?
    Are you not denying the existence of aids???
     
    Tnerb, Jan 7, 2007
    #159
  23. MetaKron

    MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    My conclusion is that HIV disease is a fraud, and the things that we call AIDS include starvation and endemic disease in Africa, and unwise use of drugs and lifestyles in America. There are also the AIDS medications, which do cause AIDS.

    AIDS denial may be immoral, but the ones who call themselves the AIDS establishment have denied the real causes of immune suppression since this started. In 1981 immune suppression was known to be caused by drugs, chemicals, nutritional deficiencies, and radiation exposure, among other things. The HIV believers have denied that immune suppression is caused by anything but HIV or an HIV like virus. This has cost lives. I could say that it has cost millions of lives in Africa, but when this thing started there had already been years of futile attempts to deal with the deaths in Africa, AND the population of Africa has been steadily increasing since then because people have ten children per family.
     
    MetaKron, Jan 7, 2007
    #160
Page 8 of 34

Share This Page