Given that nobody has even shown how HIV causes AIDS how can you tell these people arent simply dying of malaria,TB, and malnutrition like they have been for centuries?
Simple answer. IF that was the case then tell me how come only sexually mature adults (ages 15 to 55) have been hit by the 'malaria.' How come there were whole areas where the only people to be found were grandparents raising grandchildren.
Particularly when diseases like malaria hit the youngest and the oldest the hardest! How come it was the children and the aged left?
Give me a rational explanation for THAT and i will seriously mull over your assertion that it is nothing but malaria et al.
If it was nothing but a serious outbreak of malaria then it should be the grandparents and children who are dying and the adults who are surviving, but the inverse is true. How do you explain that?
Same thing with malnutrition. The first to drop are the aged, the infirm, and the young. How come then most of the dead are adults and most of the survivors children and their grandparents.
I'm actually quite curious as to what theory you will come up with as an answer. It always amazes me how people who haven't seen the dead in droves always manage to come up with all sorts of 'interesting' assertions.
BTW: I am the first to admit that most governments in Africa and Asia use AIDS as a source for funds. But saying that makes AIDS non-existent, or nothing mroe than 'malaria and malnutrition' is totally asinine.
But anyways, 'nuff of that. Please tell me how come malaria and malnutrition, afflictions that normally affect the eldest and the youngest, have skipped them over and struck the ones who would be most resistant towards disease and hunger? After all, you do say the epidemic could be due to the stuff that has been afflicting the areas for centuries. Answer that, logically, and you have a convert.