OK, just curious to see where you’re getting your info. from. Have you read the following. The first article gives an overview of how ludicrous many of these papers are, and how embarrassed the MS science journals should be for even publishing them. The second is a scientific rebuttal to the notion that HIV comes from chimps, and it specifically references a number of citations in your list of links:
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/rgold.htm
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/data/dtinterviewlm.htm
I read the first link (http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/rgold.htm) and it there is nothing scientific about it whatsoever. His sophomoric attempt to mock those who actually understand the reason for correct terminology is an embarrassment:
What is known as "HIV science" is replete with extravagant names given by HIV researchers to their speculations. For example, investigators tracking the origin of HIV adore speaking about "molecular clock analysis", "molecular epidemiology", "phylogenetic analysis", "simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIV)", "SIV and HIV gene sequences", "HIV cloning", "zoonotic transmission", "transmission early hypothesis", "transmission cause epidemic hypothesis", "parallel late transmission hypothesis", "phylogenetic history of HIV", and "molecular evolution of HIV-1" (1-9). It sounds as if everything that they describe is real. Using exotic names, researchers give birth to new myths about HIV/AIDS. Additionally, this practice is an example of how HIV researchers and top "scientific" journals, working in tandem, contribute to the widespread hysteria about viral transmission.
That is not science, that is bordering on ad hominem to bolster his point (whatever his point actually is). It did interest me enough to Google up the author which turned up this:
http://www.aidstruth.org/new/denialism/denialists/giraldo-immunoassays
How Immunoassays Work: The Curious Case of AIDS Denialist Roberto Giraldo and his Ignorance of the Basics by John P. Moore, PhD
Roberto Giraldo is employed as a laboratory technologist in the molecular diagnostics laboratory at the New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York. He is not licensed to practice medicine in New York. He has no medical appointment at the Hospital. Again, Giraldo is employed at the Hospital as a technician, not as a medical doctor or a professional academic. Giraldo has no appointment at the Weill Medical College of Cornell University, an institution affiliated to but separate from the Hospital.
On his website Giraldo writes:
The ELISA test is a test for antibodies against what is supposed to be the Human Immunodeficiency Virus or HIV. To run this test, an individual's serum has to be diluted to a ratio of 1:400 with a special specimen diluent. According to the test kit manufacturer this diluent contains "0.1% triton X-100, Bovine and Goat Sera (minimum concentration of 5%) and Human T-Lymphocyte Lysate (minimum titer 1:7500). Preservative: 0.1% Sodium Azide" (1).
I first took samples of blood that, at 1:400 dilution, tested negative for antibodies to HIV. I then ran the exact same serum samples through the test again, but this time without diluting them. Tested straight, they all came positive.
Since that time I have run about 100 specimens and have always gotten the same result. I even ran my own blood which at 1:400 reacts negative. At 1:1 [undiluted] it reacted positive. I should mention that with the exception of my own blood, the patient samples all came from doctors who requested HIV tests. It is therefore likely that most of the blood samples that I tested belonged to individuals at risk for AIDS.
In this article, often parroted on other denialist websites, Giraldo displays scientific ignorance of truly staggering proportions for someone who states: "For the last 6 years I have been working at a laboratory of clinical immunology in one of the most prestigious University Hospitals in the City of New York."
The article continues and pretty well defines Giraldo as not knowing WTF he is doing. He's not licensed to practice here, but he does have a book on the subject for sale (imagine that!)
I'll take the CDC over some homebrewed conspiracy site with "Docs" who are not what they claim to be. Their "science" smacks of the same nonsense as the 200 MPG hydrogen carburetor people who are claiming that "Big Oil" is conspiring to suppress their important information.
Plenty of people have gotten AIDS from blood transfusions (recall Ryan White) and they had NO history of drug abuse or homosexual behaviour. None. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Zero. As someone commented above, anyone who believes HIV is NOT the root of AIDS is welcome to self-inoculate. So far their have been NO takers.
The second is an interview (by a "French Science Journalist", not a scientific rebuttal.
THIS is a scientific paper that details the SIV-HIV common ancestry (reprinted since perhaps you missed it the first time it was posted: http://www.fasebj.org/cgi/reprint/15/2/276.pdf
It is a peer-reviewed document, not arbitrary ramblings on a conspiracy website. None of the references you cite mention it. Also note that Duesberg is on the board of this (and probably every other AIDS conspiracy site. http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/data2/raboard.htm