Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 08/18/2008 8:22:06 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
...AIDS denialism is a much more immediate problem than skepticism about evolution or global warming. While it might appeal to those with political motives, or to the fashionable and foolish, AIDS denialism must be countered, vocally and vociferously, because it threatens to deny a generation of children a fair shot at life.
(Excerpt) Read more at canada.com ...
Looks like the leftists over at Wikipedia have gotten in on the act too:
Denialism is a relatively new term used to describe the position of governments, business groups, interest groups, or individuals who reject propositions on which a scientific or scholarly consensus exists. Such groups and individuals are said to be engaging in denialism when they seek to influence policy processes and outcomes by using rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of argument or legitimate debate, when in actuality there is none.[1][2] The term was first used in the sense of 'holocaust denialism', but the usage has broadened to include 'AIDS denialism',[3][4][5][6][7], 'climate change denialism'[8][9][10], and 'evolution denialism'.[11]
|
If you would like to be added to the RETHINKING AIDS PING LIST drop me a FReepmail. AIDS is the biggest public health scam in medical history. Like global warming, AIDS is being used to push a powerful leftist political agenda. For over two decades the Public Health Establishment has used your tax dollars and the full power of the federal government to wage a massive propaganda (and intimidation) campaign designed to: (A) prevent the American public from hearing the scientific evidence that suggests HIV may not cause AIDS Every single point above can be documented on my profile page. If you would like to be added to the RETHINKING AIDS PING LIST drop me a FReepmail. |
They leftist kooks seemed to have left out “Nigerian Prince Bank Account denialism.” I’m guilty of that one too.
Romans 1:25-27 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Rosie O’Donell- “Fire can’t melt steel”
GGG- “HIV doesn’t cause AIDS”
==One need not go very far to find the answer to this particular tragedy: live in a monogamous relationship, and this affliction goes away.
And if you’re an HIV causes AIDS skeptic...Don’t abuse illicit drugs, feed hungry Africans, and whatever you do, stay off AIDS chemotherapy drugs (especially if you are a pregnant woman and test positive for HIV).
Drango—”I’m here to defend the homosexual AIDS agenda.”
The only thing that "threatens to deny a generation of children a fair shot at life" is the invasion of sexual deviates in our schools, trying to warp our children's morality and self respect by trying to teach them that perverted sexual activity is "normal", that anal sex, and any other sexual group activity is a recreational sport, not the ultimate act of love between a man and a woman committing themselves to each other for a lifetime, and the completion of the circle of life.
Aids isn't problem to those who live as nature intended. It's those who are living against natures design and those who teach this abnormal behavior to children that doom their futures.
Great blog...thanks for the link!
.."these people should stay away from sharp things"
Glad to see you back.
What happened? Did you read what wikipedia said about one of the “experts” you cited as a “bio-physicist”?
This is what The Supreme Court of Australia said of the “rethinker” Perth Group:
“A^ SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA, R v PARENZEE, Reasons for Decision of The Honourable Justice Sulan
“135. 135 I conclude that she(E. Papdopulos-Eleopulos) does not have expertise in the various disciplines in which expertise is required. In my opinion, she is not qualified to express opinions about the existence of HIV, or whether it has been established that it causes AIDS. Nor has she expertise to express opinions about whether the virus is transmissible. Nor is she qualified to express opinions about the tests that have been developed to diagnose the virus.
136. 136 Even if I were to conclude that Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos had some expertise to express opinions about the methodology for determining whether HIV exists, I consider her opinions to be so out of line with the prevailing opinions and the prevailing evidence which supports the existence of the virus, that no jury could rely upon her opinions. In my view, no weight could be
given to her evidence. That is a relevant factor in considering whether permission to appeal should be granted.
137. 137 Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos lacks independence. She is an advocate for a cause. She chooses to rely upon opinions of others which she often takes out of context and misinterprets. She lacks objectivity. If faced with evidence which does not support her views, she simply refuses to acknowledge it, or dismisses it without any basis for so doing. Examples of her refusal to acknowledge evidence which does not support her views include her response to the epidemiological evidence which she says is not proof and which she dismisses as unreliable.81[81]
138. 138 The evidence given by Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos about the Perth group demonstrates that she is promoting a cause. She is not independent. She is motivated to create a debate about her theory. The Perth Group will use whatever means available to promote that debate, including encouragement of persons such as the applicant, to promote their theories in courts of law.
139. 139 This is another example of the failure on the part of Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos to bring a balanced and independent assessment of the scientific evidence.
140. 140 I consider that her opinions lack any credibility. In my view, based upon her evidence, no miscarriage of justice has been demonstrated.” (April, 2007)
This “rethinker” admitted her only “expertise” was reading some articles and such yet sites like virusmyth, whom you use as a reference, regurgitates her nonsense as if it actually meant something.
Yep, them “leftists” over at wikipedia shouldn’t say anything about the “rethinkers”.
The reason I didn’t get back to you is because her credentials are all over the place depending on what you read. Based on my research, she most likely has an M.Sci, but I emailed the Perth Group just to make sure. Still waiting to hear back from them. BTW, no matter what her credentials turn out to be, she is the leader of a group of MDs and PhDs who obviously think very highly of her. And while Duesberg may disagree with the Perth group re: HIV, he devoted several chapters of one of his books giving them their due. And Duesberg is the man, according to Robert Gallo, who knows more about retroviruses than any man alive. So whatever her actual credentials might turn out to be, she has plenty of credentialed AIDS Rethinkers recommending her, and that’s good enough for me. Besides, I don’t worship credentials like you do. Some of the most credentialed scientists in the world are currently arguing that the main cause of global warming is humans. But if you take the time to read both sides, it’s clear the global warming alarmists are full of it.
I also find it interesting that the AIDS and global warming alarmists have labeled their opposition with the same word. They both refer to their opposition as “Denialists.” The fact that you can’t see that the alarmists from both camps are using psuedoscience to push a leftist political agenda is beyond me.
“Denialism” is just another piece of semantics designed to define the terms of the debate, just as adding “-phobia” to the end of whatever hideous practice one supports. So here’s my definition of the debate — anyone using the term “denialism” should be beaten to death with a steel pipe. Figuratively of course. Use of the term (other than to express derision for the term) should result in the termination of tenure, without appeal.
I’m with you! Except I’m still debating whether the steel pipe should be used literally or figuratively. All the best—GGG
Heh, yeah, it’s a quandary.
bullsh-tism again
Here’s another piece linking Global Warming and AIDS “denialism”:
“The whole stance of climate change denialists has uncanny parallels to that of AIDS denialists, who deny that HIV causes AIDS...”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-ostertag/global-warming-denialism_b_107385.html
I say we all band together so we can help these leftist morons realize their wost nightmare. And when the other side starts pissing and moaning about it, we can say we got the idea from them!
Is it not ironic that the soaring cost of energy caused by the policies of big government politicians, based on the disinformation their environmentalist allies, has caused more numbers of regular Americans to be skeptical of Anthropogenic Global Warming ™Anthropogenic Climate Change ™, at least for the time being? It requires relative affluence to pull off the hoax.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.