Thank God, finally an expert, finally someone who can point out exactly what is wrong and the scientifically motivated reason that it is so.Finally someone that can say more than :"you idiot, it's just a conspiracy:"
Halleluja!
Go ahead mr scientist
I don't see you answering his question.
hey i was just saying there isn't this secret scientific heirarchy that is fooling the world... I mean i'm sure there are some corrupt high ups in some of these companies, but does that influence every private research group in the universities, public and private research groups corporate or otherwise.... doubtful, especially because most of these university professors who are doing research want to bring fame and $$$ (grant money) to the university. What better way to do that then prove everyone wrong. I think if there was conclusively no link between HIV and AIDS, then I think we would have seen some journal publications stating that science's hypothesis on HIV - AIDS link is false.....
hey i was just saying there isn't this secret scientific heirarchy that is fooling the world... I mean i'm sure there are some corrupt high ups in some of these companies, but does that influence every private research group in the universities, public and private research groups corporate or otherwise.... doubtful, especially because most of these university professors who are doing research want to bring fame and $$$ (grant money) to the university. What better way to do that then prove everyone wrong. I think if there was conclusively no link between HIV and AIDS, then I think we would have seen some journal publications stating that science's hypothesis on HIV - AIDS link is false.
It was stated in the video that the NIH is a military organisation. Is the army known for its dialogue and open communication?Or is more along the lines of Zum Befohl...and then when things turn out wrong...Ich habe es nich gewusst. The top determines who gets the funding, which research gets financed. If a soldier steps out of line he'll either be disciplined or face the firing line(in a manner of speaking).
If I were a scientist and I saw no proof that HIV caused AIDS but the safe bet was that ppl with AIDS were HIV, and I couldn't offer a solution to AIDS or an alternative hypothesis of what then did cause AIDS. Would I put my livelyhood and reputation on the line?
Also.... if it is false..... why were HIV+ people still getting AIDS when there were no drug cocktails available when the disease first started to arise.... maybe the government was injecting people at random, right?
What about all HIV ppl that didn't get Aids, if it were that obvious there would have been a lot more ppl dying of Aids. Even considering all the ppl that didn't even know they were Hiv+.
And there were was a marked rise in Aids deaths when the first cocktails came on the market, coincidence?
I mean sometimes the right answer is simple, and it's not as complex as people make it out to be.
We know there are more than one thing that causes AIDS, but I believe, based on journal publications, personal accounts, and scientific research, that HIV is definately one of the causes. If you don't think so, then when you test positive, don't take the drugs and see what happens and report back.
Don't bother feeding it anymore, fellas...its refusal to understand logic and reason aren't accidental.
A troll's main goal is usually to arouse anger and frustration among the message board's other participants, and will write whatever it takes to achieve this end. One popular trolling strategy is the practice of Winning by Losing. While the victim is trying to put forward solid and convincing facts to prove his position, the troll's only goal is to infuriate its prey. The troll takes (what it knows to be) a badly flawed, wholly illogical argument, and then vigorously defends it while mocking and insulting its prey. The troll looks like a complete fool, but this is all part of the plan. The victim becomes noticeably angry by trying to repeatedly explain the flaws of the troll's argument. Provoking this anger was the troll's one and only goal from the very beginning.
Anyways I would look at your own argument for HIV causes Aids Hazelgod to determine what illogical actually means.
did you say you were going to jump off a bridge yesterday. just go on and do it already! :biggrin1:
There are some seriously fucked up people here on lpsg.
Regarding being close-minded and not considering your video-- I read books on the same thing years ago, and I followed Duesberg relatively closely for awhile. I read his and others' articles, then I read the refuations, then the refutations of those. It was a subject I was interested in, and since I was a biology major at the time, it also fit nicely into my studies. For a time I also worked at an HIV clinic. I, personally, have done the research that you haven't. There are many position papers out there discussing this subject from both sides. Don't think you're the first person who has come across this.Read what I said, not what some 2nd life person thought I said, coz otherwise...you'll miss the plot, and the plot thickens when you've got your head up his ass.
did you say you were going to jump off a bridge yesterday. just go on and do it already! :biggrin1:
Yes Snoozan he volunteered to jump but not from a bridge it was from a building as seen in this post http://www.lpsg.org/1020095-post24.htmlThere are some seriously fucked up people here on lpsg.
Read what I said, not what some 2nd life person thought I said, coz otherwise...you'll miss the plot, and the plot thickens when you've got your head up his ass.
After considering the things that you've said, I agree 100%. There are definitely some seriously fucked up people here on LPSG.
Saying you'd have to be seriously fucked to seriously be considering suicide makes me a seriously fucked up person, I see....
After all, you brought it up, so the burden of proof is on you. I have yet to see you bring up any legitimate points or science to debate about the subject, but instead only calling people close-minded and parroting what you saw on that video.
You're right there hasn't been a debate on the points stated in the video. The closest this thread has come to a debate is on the point if you can dismiss something outright without even watching it, or not. Or if my posting a video on this topic makes me a culprit in the Aids deaths or not.
I don't see why the burden of proof is on me, when all I said was that I was confused after seeing the video. First scientists say HIV causes AIDS, then theyre are scientists that say there is no proof of that.They said I was an idiot for believing it. Then I'd say why. Point out the points in the video that would make me gullable believing it.
I'm not saying ppl are closeminded if they watched the video and still weren't convinced. What I call closeminded is dismissing something outright without even watching it
I, for one, will debate you on this when you start talking about scientific methods, immunological principles, mechanisms of infection, infection rates, etc. etc. Until then you're just talking tinfoil hat bullshit.
Pull up some railing, y'all...I'm happy to share some stones to flick at it.
I think I am in love, snoozan. You simply rock....After all, you brought it up, so the burden of proof is on you. I have yet to see you bring up any legitimate points or science to debate about the subject, but instead only calling people close-minded and parroting what you saw on that video.
I, for one, will debate you on this when you start talking about scientific methods, immunological principles, mechanisms of infection, infection rates, etc. etc. Until then you're just talking tinfoil hat bullshit.
This thread started out nowhere.In post 107 it does sound like Hazel describing himself sometimes.
Other than that, this thread is going nowhere.