In case you have forgotten, it was you who belittled and denigrated your betters (Peter Duesberg et al). That’s the main reason I proposed the debate with Duesberg...to force you to back up your sneering, unscientific claims about a subject you freely admit to know VERY LITTLE about. I got you to agree, then you backed out. It’s that simple. If this thing is on again, please say so explicitly (which includes agreeing not to back out at the last minute) and I will once again go to the trouble of trying to set it up. But this on again, off again crap has got to stop. Make up your mind once and for all and we’ll go from there.
PS If you can find scientist from the AIDS alarmist camp who specializes in HIV/AIDS, all the better. But barring that, it will fall upon you to do the heavy lifting (which you blithely claim is so light).
If you have the data or the person with the data then please present it. They can put forth their best case and then ping me to engage the data. You can call this a “debate” if you wish, but it will be the same thing I do on any Science thread on FR.
So I agree to the same thing I have always agreed to. Present the data and I will engage it. You characterized this as “backing away”, but I have yet to see the data so how could I “debate” something you have failed to present?
“I am not an expert on either virus or HIV and would be relying entirely upon the body of knowledge that your “expert” has already rejected.”
So is this going to be about HIV/AIDS or about I.D./Creationism? Whatever the subject, have your pet Pedigreed Scientist post their data and I will engage it, the offer still stands from lo those many moons ago and I take exception to your characterization of this stand as “backing away” multiple times from a debate.