AIDS: The Great Con Trick

[tgirlnatasha]

Really interesting theory by David Icke.
What do you think about it?

http://warofillusions.wordpress.com/2008/09/18/aids-the-great-con-trick/

[hotvegasguy26]

verrry interesting....heard this before....i actually worked with a guy in vegas who's brother died of aids and he told me his brother didnt get sick until he actually started taking the meds

[tgirlnatasha]

verrry interesting....heard this before....i actually worked with a guy in vegas who's brother died of aids and he told me his brother didnt get sick until he actually started taking the meds
I heard allot of similar story and there is full of it on the net. It make you wonder sometime of what kind of crazy world we live in :cry:

[El_hefe]

Hmmm... would that be the Holocaust denying, blood-drinking reptiles disguised as humans amongst us, "son of the Godhead", mentally unstable former jock David Ickes..... or someone else with a shred of credibility?

[phobun]

Really interesting theory by David Icke.
What do you think about it?

http://warofillusions.wordpress.com/2008/09/18/aids-the-great-con-trick/

Have you ever fantasized about sucking the scaly cock off a reptilian-humanoid shapeshifter?

You should get together and have a cold-blooded gang bang with thx1138 and El Nino.

Fucking nutters.

[Nashvegas]

i do not believe this

[jjhill]

Eazy-E died from Aids 10 days after he admitted himself into the hospital for what he thought was chronic asthma.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63kRUCWstCo (1:45)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btH4e0-WQAo

He was in this video like a month b4 he died. And the second one like two or three months b4. I don't buy into the illusion, but it does make you think.

Also makes me wonder if he would of still died 10 days, or even sooner or later.

[hotvegasguy26]

i heard men's one-a-day formula cures aids

[Nashvegas]

didnt you see southpark? magic johnson cured aids. all it takes is 100,000 dollars ground up and injected into the blood. good to go

[hotvegasguy26]

this is true

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Si8beWhBkg

[phobun]

Eazy-E died from Aids 10 days after he admitted himself into the hospital for what he thought was chronic asthma.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63kRUCWstCo (1:45)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btH4e0-WQAo

He was in this video like a month b4 he died. And the second one like two or three months b4. I don't buy into the illusion, but it does make you think.

Also makes me wonder if he would of still died 10 days, or even sooner or later.

I'm pretty sure it was a Bushian illuminati take-down. EZ was getting too powerful.

[jjhill]

Eazy-E died from Aids 10 days after he admitted himself into the hospital for what he thought was chronic asthma.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63kRUCWstCo (1:45)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btH4e0-WQAo

He was in this video like a month b4 he died. And the second one like two or three months b4. I don't buy into the illusion, but it does make you think.

Also makes me wonder if he would of still died 10 days, or even sooner or later.

I'm pretty sure it was a Bushian illuminati take-down. EZ was getting too powerful.

lol naw that would be 2pac, and biggie got killed to cover up their tracks

[Felicia Katt]

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

She didn't believe HIV caused aids and refused to take the meds. Her daughter was born HIV positive and she didn't give her the meds either.

The daughter died at age 3 "of Pneumocystis pneumonia in the setting of advanced AIDS"

The mother died at 51 of "disseminated herpes virus infection and bilateral pneumonia, with oral candidiasis as a contributing cause; all three are related to HIV infection."

This misplaced belief that HIV doesn't cause AIDS lives on. These two victims of it do not.

FK

[phobun]

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

She didn't believe HIV caused aids and refused to take the meds. Her daughter was born HIV positive and she didn't give her the meds either.

The daughter died at age 3 "of Pneumocystis pneumonia in the setting of advanced AIDS"

The mother died at 51 of "disseminated herpes virus infection and bilateral pneumonia, with oral candidiasis as a contributing cause; all three are related to HIV infection."

This misplaced belief that HIV doesn't cause AIDS lives on. These two victims of it do not.

FK

I wonder how worthy2 (addicted) will respond to this. Here was a woman who stayed away from mainstream medicine yet died of AIDS. Perhaps she just needed the right kind of holistic therapy. I bet he has some nutritional supplements he would have liked to sell her.

[sugdaddie69]

Interesting,all of this is very interesting.You can't go in a doctors office an not see everything sponored by some pharmaceutical company.
Calenders,pens,clip boards,note pads.You can't turn on the TV without some new pill for WHATEVER
ails you.This country hasn't cured shit in decades.
The money made off alot of these diseases is
staggering,as is the cost of medication.Alot of people,make alot of money,by not having a cure for alot of diseases.

[hotvegasguy26]

well if ya'll really wanna get deep into it, read up on who the major shareholders are in hiv med companies like eli lilly, such as dick cheney and george bush senior. these guys have been in the game since hiv started to explode in the 80's.... you can also google info on the hep. b vaccination that was given in san francisco in 1981 to a large group of gay men all or most of which later died of aids....interesting

[Silcc69]

Population control FTW!

[phobun]

well if ya'll really wanna get deep into it, read up on who the major shareholders are in hiv med companies like eli lilly, such as dick cheney and george bush senior. these guys have been in the game since hiv started to explode in the 80's.... you can also google info on the hep. b vaccination that was given in san francisco in 1981 to a large group of gay men all or most of which later died of aids....interesting

It's amazing how a simple guy like yourself, armed only with Google, could stumble upon something so hideous yet hidden in plain sight.

Why have smarter and more able people not yet realized what you have? Are they in on the conspiracy too?

And now that you've uncovered The Truth, aren't you afraid of being disappeared by those with too much to lose?

[hotvegasguy26]

well if ya'll really wanna get deep into it, read up on who the major shareholders are in hiv med companies like eli lilly, such as dick cheney and george bush senior. these guys have been in the game since hiv started to explode in the 80's.... you can also google info on the hep. b vaccination that was given in san francisco in 1981 to a large group of gay men all or most of which later died of aids....interesting

It's amazing how a simple guy like yourself, armed only with Google, could stumble upon something so hideous yet hidden in plain sight.

Why have smarter and more able people not yet realized what you have? Are they in on the conspiracy too?

And now that you've uncovered The Truth, aren't you afraid of being disappeared by those with too much to lose?


lol they have you fuckin dipshit ... its based on fact ... corporate shareholders records are public you can find the names of any given company's shareholders through several resources, second...the shit that happened in san fransico has been cited many times in medical journals and other resources... i didn't get my information through google i was simply saying if you want to delve into the subject you can probably find it using google... but yeah way to assume shit and make yourself look like a dickhead

[phobun]

make yourself look like a dickhead

So if I look like a dickhead, do I get you horny?

[hotvegasguy26]

only if it shoots

[phobun]

only if it shoots

Would suck a bareback cock if a new partner told you they were HIV positive?

Do you really have the strength of your convictions?

[giovanni_hotel]

Mock hotvegasguy26 all you want, but big global corporations make crazy dollars off infectious diseases.

WHo do you think stands to profit since the 'new' swine flu has been classified as a global pandemic by the World Health Organization?

Pharmaceutical companies are going to make billions producing vaccines for a flu virus that has killed less people worldwide than chickenpox.

I'm not in the camp that believes HIV doesn't cause AIDS, but I've heard about that incident in SF where a group of gay men were given a Hep vaccination and instead contracted and died of AIDS.

If the U.S. government could let Black men in the SOuth contract syphillis and allow them to go untreated in medical facilities to 'observe' the effects of the illness in human beings, nothing our government does surprises me.

Oh, and Easy E died so quickly after being diagnosed because he probably had AIDs for over a year and didn't know or refused to acknowledge his illness.

[Bob's Tgirls]

It's very interesting and thought provoking. But what is the real truth? Is it what's been "established" by the medical community or this story? Anybody can write anything and there has certainly been a lot of junk science going around by doctors who need to be published to advance their careers. This is a tough one to figure out.

[jjhill]

Mock hotvegasguy26 all you want, but big global corporations make crazy dollars off infectious diseases.

WHo do you think stands to profit since the 'new' swine flu has been classified as a global pandemic by the World Health Organization?

Pharmaceutical companies are going to make billions producing vaccines for a flu virus that has killed less people worldwide than chickenpox.

I'm not in the camp that believes HIV doesn't cause AIDS, but I've heard about that incident in SF where a group of gay men were given a Hep vaccination and instead contracted and died of AIDS.

If the U.S. government could let Black men in the SOuth contract syphillis and allow them to go untreated in medical facilities to 'observe' the effects of the illness in human beings, nothing our government does surprises me.

Oh, and Easy E died so quickly after being diagnosed because he probably had AIDs for over a year and didn't know or refused to acknowledge his illness.

Yea that's the thing, his body didn't start deteriorating until the point where he checked in the hospital. The months prior to that he was able to shoot videos, tour, work on bone albums, etc. He could of had it for months, years, who knows? I just think it's amazing for an individual to have A.I.D.s and seem perfectly healthy up to ten days before their death

[phobun]

I'm not in the camp that believes HIV doesn't cause AIDS, but I've heard about that incident in SF where a group of gay men were given a Hep vaccination and instead contracted and died of AIDS.

Perhaps if they were at risk for hepatitis, they might have also been at risk for HIV?

[fred41]

I guess it comes down to what you want to believe when the chips are down. People can make up their own minds. I took the Hep.B vaccine when it came out...and I'll take any vaccine that gets developed after that. If I ever get Hiv..then I'll also take those meds.I've seen what happens to people when they stop taking them.....and I saw what happened to people before the meds were developed...it's not pretty.

For those conspiracy believers...I hope to God you all stay as healthy as can be.But if you develop Hiv (and i honestly hope that never happens)..i wouldn't count on a bottle of vitamins or a salad of mixed greens to keep you alive. holistics might be fine when there is nothing else besides prayer...but I'd rather count on whatever modern science comes up with when my backs against the wall.

[BrendaQG]

:-? at this whole thread.

[giovanni_hotel]

There is a middle ground between paranoia and blind faith; it's called healthy skepticism when shit doesn't sound or look quite right to one's sense of reality.

Need any more proof, why do you think tens of thousands of Iranian 20somethings are rioting in the streets ofTehran this very moment?

Because they're all paranoid conspiracy theorists who are unwilling to believe incumbent President Ahmadinejad didn't win re-election fair and square, or are they following their instincts and refusing to trust in the infallibility of their mullah-controlled state government?

Remember that Anthrax that was sent in the mail following 9/11?? That shit wasn't concocted in some dude's bathtub, that was a highly sophisticated, weapons grade bio-agent.

Iraq nor Al Qaeda have the technological sophistication to mill weapons grade anthrax, but the Pentagon has labs all over the country with that capability.

And if you think the microbiologist Bruce Ivins who recently 'died' was behind that anthrax attack in '01, IMO you have an unhealthy belief in the morality of the U.S. governnment.

[BrendaQG]

There is a middle ground between paranoia and blind faith; it's called healthy skepticism when shit doesn't sound or look quite right to one's sense of reality.

Need any more proof, why do you think tens of thousands of Iranian 20somethings are rioting in the streets ofTehran this very moment?

They are rioting because the people living in Iran's small towns voted for a conservative politician. They don't realize that more people live in medium to small towns and cities than in big metroplises.



Remember that Anthrax that was sent in the mail following 9/11?? That shit wasn't concocted in some dude's bathtub, that was a highly sophisticated, weapons grade bio-agent.

Iraq nor Al Qaeda have the technological sophistication to mill weapons grade anthrax, but the Pentagon has labs all over the country with that capability.

And if you think the microbiologist Bruce Ivins who recently 'died' was behind that anthrax attack in '01, IMO you have an unhealthy belief in the morality of the U.S. governnment.

If you know where to look on the net, you can find what I thought about that. Basically that the government in it's little press conference after Ivins died relied on the old mad scientist sterotype to sell the public on him being the perpetrator.

All that said their is too much undisputed evidence that HIV does cause AIDS.

Let me ask you something. If I had a syringe full of HIV could I inject it into you? :-/

[sugdaddie69]

:-? at this whole thread.
Its an interesting debate,pharmaceutical companies do make billions off every fucking disease ,and the cost of medication in this country is crazy.
Maybe those new tits have affected your brain,normally you'd have your intellec opinion on this.

[MrF]

What do I think about it ? I think David Icke is by no means a scientific authority and is not very credible in general (believes in reptilian humanoids and such things). Regarding HIV, you have to listen to the CDC and medical professionals, unless you want to subscribe to Icke's conspiracy theories and distrust the "Global Elite".

Gimme a break.

Use common sense: if there were a conspiracy, lots of people would leak out the truth, and not just one nutcase.

[giovanni_hotel]

Brenda QG, read all posts before you diss!! :(

I never said nor implied that HIV didn't cause AIDs.

You comment about the protests in Tehran make no sense.

Students are protesting in Iran because they don't believe a man who governs a country with two-thirds of its citizens under the age of 30, where 26% of people under the age of 25 are unemployed, in an election where purportedly there was 85% voter participation, would vote 6 out of 10 for the guy who mismanaged oil revenues, crashed the economy and wants to start a nuclear war with Israel.

Ahmadinejad 'defeated' Mousavi by 30 percentage points in his own home town, where his support was strongest.

Also, the population centers in Iran are not in the rural areas, they are in the cities and the towns surrounding Tehran.

But you keep believing Ahmadinejad is the legitimately elected president of Iran; the state run media announced hours after the election with polls still open that Ahmadinejad had won in a landslide!!

[thx1138]

putting profits ahead of medical ethics: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aTLcF3zT1Pdo Who would have thought?

[hotvegasguy26]

only if it shoots

Would suck a bareback cock if a new partner told you they were HIV positive?

Do you really have the strength of your convictions?

phobun what the fuck are you talking about? apparently you like just bringing up random shit and you have no real arguement here.... go post on another thread and come back when you know what the fuck you're saying

[hotvegasguy26]

and regarding Eazy-E remember the dudes point was that "recreational drugs" and azt cause aids which if that is really the case i'm sure eazy was doin his fair share... or a hell of alot more

[EyeCumInPiece]

Crazy shit.

[phobun]

only if it shoots

Would suck a bareback cock if a new partner told you they were HIV positive?

Do you really have the strength of your convictions?

phobun what the fuck are you talking about? apparently you like just bringing up random shit and you have no real arguement here.... go post on another thread and come back when you know what the fuck you're saying

Seriously chump, answer the question. If you truly believe in what you are saying, are you then willing to have unprotected sex with someone who turns you on, despite that person telling you that they are HIV positive?

[hotvegasguy26]

only if it shoots

Would suck a bareback cock if a new partner told you they were HIV positive?

Do you really have the strength of your convictions?

phobun what the fuck are you talking about? apparently you like just bringing up random shit and you have no real arguement here.... go post on another thread and come back when you know what the fuck you're saying

Seriously chump, answer the question. If you truly believe in what you are saying, are you then willing to have unprotected sex with someone who turns you on, despite that person telling you that they are HIV positive?

god you are a fucking idiot ... it never stops with you... i never said i was agreeing with this theory... i was simply offering information for people to look up and decide for themselves what they wanna believe....once again .... READ THE FUCKING POSTS BEFORE YOU COMMENT ON THEM , ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE RUDE COMMENTS TOWARD SOMEONE BASED ON YOUR TWISTED INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THEY ARE SAYING... MAKES YOU LOOK RETARDED

[alpha2117]

I'll make this simple. Throughout Africa huge numbers of people die through the AIDS virus. Many have neve taken the meds because they cant afford those kind of things.

The truth is there is some evidence that some of the meds will cause a decline in health initially much in the same way cancer treatment does. If you introduce medication into a health compromised individual especially one whih a severly comprimised immune system there is a chance it will make them worse. Overall though the meds will help more often than they will hurt.

[phobun]

only if it shoots

Would suck a bareback cock if a new partner told you they were HIV positive?

Do you really have the strength of your convictions?

phobun what the fuck are you talking about? apparently you like just bringing up random shit and you have no real arguement here.... go post on another thread and come back when you know what the fuck you're saying

Seriously chump, answer the question. If you truly believe in what you are saying, are you then willing to have unprotected sex with someone who turns you on, despite that person telling you that they are HIV positive?

god you are a fucking idiot ... it never stops with you... i never said i was agreeing with this theory... i was simply offering information for people to look up and decide for themselves what they wanna believe....once again .... READ THE FUCKING POSTS BEFORE YOU COMMENT ON THEM , ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE RUDE COMMENTS TOWARD SOMEONE BASED ON YOUR TWISTED INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THEY ARE SAYING... MAKES YOU LOOK RETARDED

Don't lose your cool man. You trotted out some lame conspiracy garbage and now you're saying you never agreed with it.

This thread is about David Icke's bizarre conspiracy theory that the HIV virus is not really a problem. You've listed some gibberish about dick cheney and bush senior and the shareholders of pharmaceutical companies to look up, but why not clarify whether you believe HIV is a dangerous virus that causes AIDS?

[hotvegasguy26]

only if it shoots

Would suck a bareback cock if a new partner told you they were HIV positive?

Do you really have the strength of your convictions?

phobun what the fuck are you talking about? apparently you like just bringing up random shit and you have no real arguement here.... go post on another thread and come back when you know what the fuck you're saying

Seriously chump, answer the question. If you truly believe in what you are saying, are you then willing to have unprotected sex with someone who turns you on, despite that person telling you that they are HIV positive?

god you are a fucking idiot ... it never stops with you... i never said i was agreeing with this theory... i was simply offering information for people to look up and decide for themselves what they wanna believe....once again .... READ THE FUCKING POSTS BEFORE YOU COMMENT ON THEM , ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE RUDE COMMENTS TOWARD SOMEONE BASED ON YOUR TWISTED INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THEY ARE SAYING... MAKES YOU LOOK RETARDED

Don't lose your cool man. You trotted out some lame conspiracy garbage and now you're saying you never agreed with it.

This thread is about David Icke's bizarre conspiracy theory that the HIV virus is not really a problem. You've listed some gibberish about dick cheney and bush senior and the shareholders of pharmaceutical companies to look up, but why not clarify whether you believe HIV is a dangerous virus that causes AIDS?

because clarifying my opinion wasnt the point... i dont really have an opinion on the matter and once again i never agreed with what the report said.... and how is the shit i said about bush/cheney jibberish if it's true? and why am i spending so much time trying to correct your dumb ass? if you're not competent enough to understand the conversation then i dont know what the fuck else to tell you except that Jesus loves you

[tstv_lover]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEKC4bTKxu8

"The human race can survive perfectly well without an endless supply of new drugs but the pharmaceutical industry cannot" [Jacky Law]

This is a brief intro to an absorbing documentary on health care imbalances, particularly regarding pharmaceutical companies.

According to this documentary, the profits made by BIGPHARMA exceeds the combined profits of the other 499 companies on the Fortune 500 list.

[MrF]

The fact that rich and powerful people are invested in HIV-related drug companies doesn't prove anything about a conspiracy. Such people are often in a position to make money on pretty much anything that happens if there's a reaction to it that can make money. So what ? The rich get richer if they react and invest well.

If HIV didn't cause AIDS it would be discussed in scientific and medical circles and the truth would come out in good journalism.

[Quinn]

Anyone who takes anything David Icke ( :screwy ) has to say seriously is clearly an idiot. It's just that simple.

-Quinn

[tgirlnatasha]

It's funny how people that are suppose to be open minded are fast to judge and call other by childish names. No wonder that the world is such in deep shit. If you are not ready to ask question about what is really going on here and make or short passage in this reality a little better, please be kind enough to respect other that do so. Peace :?

[Instrumental]

His article lacks sources so it doesn't seem reliable at all in comparison to the numerous scientific journals and documents that do have them.

[TomSelis]

http://guermonprez.eu/paul/blog/public/images/etc/tin-foil-hat.jpg

[MrF]

I certainly agree with tgirlnatasha to respect each other even if we disagree. For one thing it avoids feuds which just drag the forum down and waste time -- although I think some find them entertaining.

I can suggest an algorithm for avoiding conflict and reducing blood pressure in forums: If someone replies, they are either right, wrong, or it's just a difference of opinion. A fourth possibility is they hurl abuse. If the latter, I can let it go -- and assume the other readers will make up their own mind. Likewise I would let stand a difference of opinion. If the respondent is right, I'll admit it if I realize it. But if they are wrong I might try to clarify or help them understand, then give up if I'm getting nowhere.

[deee757]

I dont know if I would roll the dice by avoiding medication and treatments if I caught the virus. But I will say this. I was in college and we were forced to get flu shots, and I caught the flu two days later. I never had the flu before that, never had the flu after and I never get flu shots. No one in my household gets flu shots and no one ever has the flu, mean while I know many people he get flu shots yearly and they have the flu yearly.

[RubyTS]

what i hear is that if people take mads they have to be consistant.
Otherwise the virus builds a tolerance and becomes even stronger.

[LTR_Seeker]

just wear the Trojans play it safe

[tgirlnatasha]

Toys are also safe, that's of cause if you don't share :rock2

[hotvegasguy26]

i always wanted to use an inflatable butt plug on someone

[Azanti]

Despite the Governments commitment to fighting the disease, the annual budget allocated to HIV for local London councils has been cut on average by 8%. Camden and Islington where this film was set has had its budget reduced from £600,000 to £425,000 for the year 2005.

Government spending on HIV services has not increased in the UK in the last three years.

On average one person is diagnosed with HIV in the UK every ninety minutes.

One person is diagnosed in the world every 6 seconds.

14,000 people are diagnosed world-wide every day. 2500 of these are children.

The highest increase of HIV is now in young women. There is still no overall education policy on HIV taught in U.K schools. Many do not teach sex education at all. One third of all pregnant African women are HIV positive.

The same number of people estimated to have been killed by the Asian Tsunami of Christmas 2004 die every few weeks in Africa of AIDS related illnesses.

It is estimated at the current rate of infection in Africa by the year 2020 two thirds of the population below the Sub Sahara will be HIV positive.

In the UK 2007 nearly 400,000 STI transmissions were recorded, over half of the people involved were aged between 16 and 24 years.

The UN estimates that, currently, there are 14 million AIDS orphans and that by the year 2010 there will be 25 million.

[sockmonkey]

I'm not in the camp that believes HIV doesn't cause AIDS, but I've heard about that incident in SF where a group of gay men were given a Hep vaccination and instead contracted and died of AIDS.




A collection of gay men from 1980's San Francisco died of AIDS?

Surely you're joking.

[FREEFALLL666]

His article lacks sources so it doesn't seem reliable at all in comparison to the numerous scientific journals and documents that do have them.Yea and the Manmade Global Warming bullshit is backed up by numerous misinterpreted sources. You can quote Gandhi, Jesus and the Dalli Lama to justify war if you misinterpret their sayings.. Al Quaida do that daily with only 1 major source..


As for the African AIDS problem. One of the major factors that is conveniently ignored by many is the "Witchdoctor factor" in many uneducated areas of Africa a supposed "cure" for AIDS is to rape a virgin. It may be increasing by other means too but that is one MAJOR factor in the rise.

Interesting article OP but still a great work of fiction, could be the forward of the next Dan Brown book, The Unholy Chalice... :lol:

[jcinva]

Really interesting theory by David Icke.
What do you think about it?

http://warofillusions.wordpress.com/2008/09/18/aids-the-great-con-trick/

Lotta fuckwits on the Internet. It's the realization of that old saw about the infinite number of monkeys. It's one of the major problems with a democracy: idiots are permitted to speak and vote. And, now, of course, with our modern and enlightened notions that it's disrespectful to point out that someone is a fucking moron because, after all, we're all Children of the Universe - well, you see a lot of stupidity making it to print and television.

My guess is, this Icke guy has run the numbers. You say the sun's going to rise tomorrow and no-one's going to pay much attention. Get up on a soap box and start ranting about a spaceship behind a comet and, while most of the sane folk will write you off as a nut case, you're bound to attract a handful of dopes who, for various reasons, have written off critical thinking as part of their trip.

Here's the litmus for this sort of bullshit: Observe a select group of fresh HIV+ diagnosees over period of several years. My initial hypothesis is that most of 'em will run straight for the clinic to sign up for their meds, this hard-hitting "expose," notwithstanding. The resolute holdouts that stay the course can provide us some mild entertainment or compassionate tsk-tsk'ing while they watch their T-cell counts plummet, contemplate their navels, stick it to Big Pharma and, of course, drop dead some years down the road from their annual winter cold or some other otherwise trivial ARC malady.

I'm not saying the government and business don't lie to us on a regular basis. I mean, you need only watch an episode of your favorite sitcom to get bombarded with, what, 18 minutes of lying bullshit. They're not paying millions of dollars per spot to educate us with the facts.

But HIV not related to AIDS? GMAFB!
Even on this board, where denial is the all-time favorite staple commodity, a thrown bullshit flag is clearly in order. One fantasy - that the lovely in a tight dress rubbing up against you with a flesh hammer bigger than your own is a chick, and that sucking that monster until the sun comes up is a perfectly hetero act in which to engage - is, all things considered, a fairly benign delusion. This one, however, has the potential to get well-intended, but gullible and, ultimately stupid and self-destructive people, killed.

Not saying that a little culling of the herd of imbeciles might not be a good thing, but there are probably more humane ways to go about it.

[MacShreach]

Get up on a soap box and start ranting about a spaceship behind a comet and, while most of the sane folk will write you off as a nut case, you're bound to attract a handful of dopes who, for various reasons, have written off critical thinking as part of their trip.




:claps :claps :claps :claps :claps :claps :claps :claps :claps

[Instrumental]

His article lacks sources so it doesn't seem reliable at all in comparison to the numerous scientific journals and documents that do have them.Yea and the Manmade Global Warming bullshit is backed up by numerous misinterpreted sources. You can quote Gandhi, Jesus and the Dalli Lama to justify war if you misinterpret their sayings.. Al Quaida do that daily with only 1 major source..

Interpretation of philosophy, beliefs and religious doctrine is not analogous to interpretation of facts and scientific data. With experiments and data it's either true or it's not; it either happened or it did not; it's not a matter of opinion. Global warming is a different argument entirely and not at all necessary to bring up (and in an attempt to not digress from the topic I'll leave it at that). The fact of the matter is, the article originally posted in this topic lacks any credibility due to the fact that the author has no sources to back up his claims. On the other hand not only does the connection between HIV and AIDS have backing on paper but it has also brought rise to treatments and possible cures* for the ailment. Proving that it's not just theoretical but holds true in reality as well.

*
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/02/11/health.hiv.stemcell/index.html?eref=rss_latest
http://www.kvue.com/news/state/stories/072908kvuehivbreakthrough-cb.14e217f8.html

[FREEFALLL666]

His article lacks sources so it doesn't seem reliable at all in comparison to the numerous scientific journals and documents that do have them.Yea and the Manmade Global Warming bullshit is backed up by numerous misinterpreted sources. You can quote Gandhi, Jesus and the Dalli Lama to justify war if you misinterpret their sayings.. Al Quaida do that daily with only 1 major source..

Interpretation of philosophy, beliefs and religious doctrine is not analogous to interpretation of facts and scientific data. With experiments and data it's either true or it's not; it either happened or it did not; it's not a matter of opinion. Global warming is a different argument entirely and not at all necessary to bring up (and in an attempt to not digress from the topic I'll leave it at that). The fact of the matter is, the article originally posted in this topic lacks any credibility due to the fact that the author has no sources to back up his claims. On the other hand not only does the connection between HIV and AIDS have backing on paper but it has also brought rise to treatments and possible cures* for the ailment. Proving that it's not just theoretical but holds true in reality as well.

*
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/02/11/health.hiv.stemcell/index.html?eref=rss_latest
http://www.kvue.com/news/state/stories/072908kvuehivbreakthrough-cb.14e217f8.html
Err yes it is.
In Ickes case he has taken the data that he sees as being plausible whilst ignoring all evidence that proves him wrong.
Like the Global Warming Lie, hard science proves it is a myth. But like Icke suggests though slightly wrongly in his article, the rich organizations that profit from charging extra for Green products and those who conveniently get free business class free champagne and 6 star hotels plane trips to Barbados and Tokyo etc.. prefer to buy into the myth.
Now I aint saying that the article is right about the AIDS situation but these articles that supposedly support Global Warming quote sources left right and center, sources that are misinterpreted and horrendously wrong.

All the references in the world wont make bad science right. They make it seem right, they may even increase your profit margins but then you have to be seen to stand by your beliefs, not what is true.

Hell I could write a paper on the Synchrotron Light Source Particle Accelerator and not provide a single source and be 100% accurate, I could write a paper on hidden meanings of Romeo and Juliette's soliloquies and provide 9,000,000 sources and be 100% wrong.

[jcinva]

Am I the only one who finds this, and similar threads, in this context, on this board, absol-fucking-lutely hilarious?


While the Global Warming Hypothesis does appear plausible in light of the findings of the '07 MIT Symposium, I would direct your attention to Klephoffen's recent submission to the April 2009 Journal of Environmental Sciences where he presents data from the ...

... hold on. Bob just posted some new Kimber James shots. Man, is that one smokin' hot cock or what? I'd like to smear that fucker with Gulden's, toss it in a bun and, like, take my ass to the ball game. All night long.

Am I right, or what? Five up top, dude.

[MacShreach]

All the references in the world wont make bad science right. They make it seem right, they may even increase your profit margins but then you have to be seen to stand by your beliefs, not what is true.

Hell I could write a paper on the Synchrotron Light Source Particle Accelerator and not provide a single source and be 100% accurate, I could write a paper on hidden meanings of Romeo and Juliette's soliloquies and provide 9,000,000 sources and be 100% wrong.

That is the difference between academic and scientific proof. In academic proof, all we require is supporting reference. There is indeed a very great deal of bad academic thinking.

Standards of proof in science are much higher; scientific proof requires a repeatable experimental proof. That is why the Theory of Evolution is just that; any right-thinking person accepts that it is true, but we cannot experimentally prove it, so it's a theory, not a Law like Boyle's Law, for example, which I can experimentally prove to anyone who asks.

As for your paper, you could be as accurate as you like, but without proof it's still just theory; and while 9 million references are a bit steep, people have been building careers on utterly specious treatises on the hidden meanings of Shakespeare since a long time before either of us were born.

Unfortunately, and especially in recent years, much science has been paid for by organisations who have a vested interest in the result; this is very bad, especially when they then use teams of PR people to promote those findings, often in highly unscientific terms, because it's more riveting copy. This has led to a situation where, for example, claims by scientists are not believed when those claims conflict with a perceived wisdom, and this is very much the case in the climate debate. People are encouraged to believe the PR, and not examine the science, because it suits the ends of the organisations paying for it.

I don't really think there is such a thing as "bad science." There's science and bullshit. However there has been a great deal of good science which has been misrepresented.

[trish]

Gentlemen ( Freefall & MacShreach);
You do not support your cases well by your examples. The hypothesis of global warming is not refuted by hard science and the theory of evolution is not any less established than the theory of ideal gases of which Boyle’s law is a constituent.

It’s true that global warming is just a hypothesis and certainty concerning its truth or falsity would have a great deal of policy fallout. The political nature of global warming’s consequences complicate the already complex methodological procedures necessary for its proper scientific assessment. But there certainly is no refutation from the hard sciences.

It is true that evolution is just a theory, but that’s also true of relativity, statistical mechanics and every other science. Laws are the axioms and theorems that constitute theories; e.g. the addition of velocities law is a constituent part of the theory of relativity.

But on all the major points, I agree with you guys. The nice thing about scientific hypothesis (as opposed to hypothesis in general) is that they can be tested against repeated observations by independent observers. The nice thing about scientists is that they will admit when a hypothesis isn’t bearing up to the close scrutiny of their experimental colleagues. This doesn’t always mean they give up on the hypothesis entirely, nor do they give up on the theory to which the hypothesis belongs entirely. But they do take the result as pointing to a failure to properly understand all the aspects of the issue they’re studying; e.g. they go back to the drawing board and either modify the theory or scrap it for a new one. This is not the case with alternative medicines. In alternative medicine every success is touted as proof and failures are simply never mentioned. If you ask what do the successes prove exactly, you’re given some mumbo jumbo about energy flow and energy fields that is neither, quantitative, detailed nor coherent. There can in fact be no proof because there is no coherent understanding to prove. There can be no disproof, because there is no coherent misunderstanding to disprove. Practitioners of alternative medicines do not seek understanding. The honest ones seek only treatments. The dishonest ones seek only to sell treatments. Either way, cures are extremely difficult to come by without the guidance of real theory. When lives are at stake reliance on trial and error should be the last alternative.

[FREEFALLL666]

I was just stating that without direct sources you can be accurate. For instance

Tyrannosaurus Rex had banana sized teeth and lived approximately 65 million years ago..

Now that sentence was true, I don't need to go to Jack Horner and the Natural History Museum of London to get sources to back up that info.

Neither does say an article in National Geographic have to mention that Professor X made the discovery about fossilization as found in this paper WWW.EXAMPLESITE.COM/DONTBOTHERCLICKING every time they mention the process of fossilization.

[MacShreach]

Gentlemen ( Freefall & MacShreach);
You do not support your cases well by your examples. The hypothesis of global warming is not refuted by hard science



Eh? What? Did I say it was?


and the theory of evolution is not any less established than the theory of ideal gases of which Boyle’s law is a constituent.


And in these words you yourself draw the same distinction as I did.





It’s true that global warming is just a hypothesis and certainty concerning its truth or falsity would have a great deal of policy fallout. The political nature of global warming’s consequences complicate the already complex methodological procedures necessary for its proper scientific assessment. But there certainly is no refutation from the hard sciences.


I did not say that hard science refuted the GW hypothesis. What I said was "claims by scientists are not believed when those claims conflict with a perceived wisdom, and this is very much the case in the climate debate." Although, as it happens, I believe that the GW lobby have used PR techniques to further their ends very successfully, the above is true of both sides; there are examples, both supporting and challenging the GW hypothesis, of the science being thoroughly drowned out by the hype.




It is true that evolution is just a theory, but that’s also true of relativity, statistical mechanics and every other science. Laws are the axioms and theorems that constitute theories; e.g. the addition of velocities law is a constituent part of the theory of relativity.



Where did I say anything to contradict this? I just used evolution because I'm re-reading Darwin (long story; surfeit of religious stuff.)




But on all the major points, I agree with you guys. The nice thing about scientific hypothesis (as opposed to hypothesis in general) is that they can be tested against repeated observations by independent observers. The nice thing about scientists is that they will admit when a hypothesis isn’t bearing up to the close scrutiny of their experimental colleagues. This doesn’t always mean they give up on the hypothesis entirely, nor do they give up on the theory to which the hypothesis belongs entirely. But they do take the result as pointing to a failure to properly understand all the aspects of the issue they’re studying; e.g. they go back to the drawing board and either modify the theory or scrap it for a new one. This is not the case with alternative medicines. In alternative medicine every success is touted as proof and failures are simply never mentioned. If you ask what do the successes prove exactly, you’re given some mumbo jumbo about energy flow and energy fields that is neither, quantitative, detailed nor coherent. There can in fact be no proof because there is no coherent understanding to prove. There can be no disproof, because there is no coherent misunderstanding to disprove. Practitioners of alternative medicines do not seek understanding. The honest ones seek only treatments. The dishonest ones seek only to sell treatments. Either way, cures are extremely difficult to come by without the guidance of real theory. When lives are at stake reliance on trial and error should be the last alternative.

Agreed.

[MacShreach]

I was just stating that without direct sources you can be accurate.

I agree. If I drop a tape measure off my boat, I do not need to refer to Newton to know that I am now fucked because I will have to go to the shop to get another one.

I do have a long-standing and pretty visceral dispute with people who use academic proof without referring back to observable phenomena, stemming possibly from my schooldays, which is what I was musing about. I wasn't accusing you of doing it, I was more struck by the analogy you drew.

[trish]

Mostly my global warming comments were to Freefall and my comments on theory to MacShreach. I meant no offense to either of you. My point about theory is that laws need not be any better established than the theories to which they belong. The relativistic addition of velocities is an example. That acquired characteristics are uninheritable, a law of Darwin’s theory, is another. I read MacShreach’s post (perhaps wrongly) as suggesting that laws are always better established than theories. I also read the post as suggesting there are no experimental tests of evolution and that’s why it will always remain a theory. The theory however makes predictions that are testable and have been tested. A consequence of Darwin’s theory is that inheritable traits must be passed through the generations in discrete form (i.e. it predicted the existence of a genetic code). The theory of genetic drift, put forward by Darwin as a component of the theory of evolution, with the understanding of simple Mendelian genetics [] can be quantified and tested with fruit flies, bacteria, viruses and other rapidly mutating organisms. In science the word “theory” has no epistemological implications, it simply is a term that refers to a body of interrelated propositions about the world. I’m sure Freefall and MacShreach are well aware of these pedantries. I only repeat them, because I’m not sure everyone posting in this thread is aware of these points. In the context of life and death issues like AIDs, I rather everyone be aware of just how science works and what the jargon means. I do thank both of you, Freefall and MacShreach for continuing the battle to keep everybody informed.

[edits in square brackets]

[MacShreach]

I meant no offense to either of you. .

Trish. Just so you know, you never have offended me, not once in the last four years or whatever, and I very seriously doubt if you ever will. You are a formidable intellect who I'm sure could run rings round me if it ever came to it, and I respect you for that.

You are also, if I may say so, very very nice.

That's all just so's you know, you know?

And you're quite right about HIV/AIDS. It's no joking issue and despite the fact that survival times in the West are much much longer now, this is not the case elsewhere. I've known a couple of people lost to it, one a doctor who was infected when he tried to help someone who had been struck in a road accident; the victim turned out to be an addict, HIV pos. Not even a little bit funny.

[fred41]

...and please, I wish that all of you that are members of this board who are sexually active (especially hobbyists with SOs)...please at the very least- get tested regularly for hiv and then make your minds up as to what to do about the results. This benefits everybody...not just yourselves.

[FREEFALLL666]

I was just stating that without direct sources you can be accurate.

I agree. If I drop a tape measure off my boat, I do not need to refer to Newton to know that I am now fucked because I will have to go to the shop to get another one.

I do have a long-standing and pretty visceral dispute with people who use academic proof without referring back to observable phenomena, stemming possibly from my schooldays, which is what I was musing about. I wasn't accusing you of doing it, I was more struck by the analogy you drew.

Maybee its just having a Particle Physicist as a father but I take allot of what I read with a gallon of salt and a kilo of common sense.. :D

[Marilyn]

Education is the best road to prevention!
Learn the Facts, forget the myths!

My brother thought that HIV_AIDS was a LGTB disease mostly!
"condoms are for fags, I only fuck women, and they're all healthy looking"

He died in 2005 of AIDS complications, didn't even know he had contracted HIV until late 2004 when he was taken to hospital cuz of pneumonia and got all types of tests including hiv test! Last time I saw him, he asked me to teach his kids about the facts of HIV-AIDS to educate them on it! He died on May 2005.
That is one of the reasons I produced the ad you see on my signature here...the youtube link...

It's 2009 come on let's be real and educated!

[Azanti]

Sorry to hear that Marilyn, and a good point to ad there.

HIV effects one race of people - the human race...

[wadeintheslade]

Let's not forget David Icke also believes Lizard People are in cahoots with the illumanati to control the world

[dc_guy_75]

No need for Thabo Mbekish conspiracies...please

[tstv_lover]

When all's said and done, the human race can survive without new drugs...the pharmacutical industry cannot.

So just how ethical and correct are Big Pharma CEO's and doctors?
http://www.naturalnews.com/025833_Big_Pharma_cancer_Bextra.html

Sure makes you wonder.

[Instrumental]

I was just stating that without direct sources you can be accurate. For instance

I wasn't trying to say otherwise. All I'm saying is that if a person is trying to make an argument that attempts to convince and educate people, simply making claims isn't going to cut it. The claims and supposed facts are conflicting on either side so it is imperative that both sides have the sources to back up their claims otherwise the person has no foundation for their argument and leaves it wide open for scrutiny and skepticism.

[badboy69]

Interesting,all of this is very interesting.You can't go in a doctors office an not see everything sponored by some pharmaceutical company.
Calenders,pens,clip boards,note pads.You can't turn on the TV without some new pill for WHATEVER
ails you.This country hasn't cured shit in decades.
The money made off alot of these diseases is
staggering,as is the cost of medication.Alot of people,make alot of money,by not having a cure for alot of diseases.

The thing is what do you do? if you have a headach do you tough it out or take an asprin?

some drugs do make you feel better some are not needed the problem is knowing which ones to take or not take be informed before you take something ask your doctor they are given money by the drug companies but most really do want to help their patients.
the big picture here is be informed! dont listen to hearsay get more then one opinion!