Replies

In the case of the HIV/AIDS connection, I see nothing wrong with further research in the area especially considering the qualifications of the man who’s suggesting that HIV does not cause AIDS. When one of the foremost microbiologists in this country suggests something, you’d think people would at least give it a fair hearing.

If HIV IS the cause of AIDS, that research will only further confirm it, and it may be that in the process they stumble across something that gives us a better understanding of it.

If it’s not the cause of AIDS, better to stop wasting time and money now doing nothing more than chasing our tails. Find the real cause and help people.

Is there really something wrong with that?

Is there really something wrong with that?

There was nothing wrong with that 25 years ago.

In the case of the HIV/AIDS connection, I see nothing wrong with further research in the area especially considering the qualifications of the man who’s suggesting that HIV does not cause AIDS. When one of the foremost microbiologists in this country suggests something, you’d think people would at least give it a fair hearing.

This is a very good articulation of my original position. That as long as it based on a fair assessment of the facts, it is worthy of consideration. I have read good and convincing arguments, concerning HIV not being responsible for AIDS. Similarly, I once read an article many, many years ago, about the idea of geocentrism, in Sky and Telescope magazine. About how it wasn't so certain that geocentrism was crazy. The article made a very good presentation, and fair assessment of the facts at hand. In the end, I didn't decide that now the earth is the center of the universe, but I did give it consideration, because it was a fair assessment, and a reasonable argument. Any idea that is based on the facts at hand, is deserving of consideration. I still believe that the earth revolves around the sun, and most likely, HIV causes AIDS.

My original point was that I consider any position that represents a fair assessment of the facts at hand, and is deserving of consideration.

“When one of the foremost microbiologists in this country suggests something, you’d think people would at least give it a fair hearing.”

Unless he is talking about evolution then he is automatically wrong. Is it really too much to expect you to be consistent?