ImprobableJoe
New Member
This most recent part of the thread, led by khronikos's unfounded, illogical, and downright silly claims, reminds me of this fun link: Unified theory of the crank
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
nonreligious gish gallop.
ImprobableJoe said:It goes far beyond "goofball on the Internet believes something dumb"... that's Libertarians. :lol:
Hmm.... didn't I warn you about off topic posts?khronikos said:WHERE IS IT! WHO MADE IT UP! WHY IS IT REFUTED BY http://www.ae911truth.org/
looks like I did.borrofburi said:Mod Note:
Also off-topic posts are technically against the rules, and while we tend not to care much, this particular set of rants is quickly resulting in a parallel thread. So either create a new thread for 9/11 discussion, drop that conversation, or face the wrath of the forum moderators.
These are the moments I wish we could upvote posts. I love you, Joe. No homo.SpaceCDT said:oHAHAHAHAHAR aren't we an excellent comedian.ImprobableJoe said:It goes far beyond "goofball on the Internet believes something dumb"... that's Libertarians. :lol:
Get boned!
khronikos said:You people are going to have to read and think for yourselves. I am not your mammy. It's not a hundred pages. It's a couple. Can't read. That's your problem. This is discussion. Not khronikos prove everything that ever happened in the world on our great forums so all of us can debunk you with our very own opinions.
"I can't find a single virologist who will give me references which show that HIV is the probable cause of AIDS. On an issue as important as this there should be a set of scientific documents somewhere, research papers written by people who are accessible, demonstrating this. But they are not available. If you ask a virologist for that information, you don't get an answer, you get fury." (The Sunday Times, April 26, 1992).
* The hypothesis has been a total failure in terms of producing health benefits.
* Over 150 chimpanzees have been infected with HIV by the National Institutes of Health during the past nine years. All are still healthy.
* "AIDS" is not a new disease; there is in fact no such disease as "AIDS." 25 previously known and unrelated diseases have been conveniently lumped together and redefined as "AIDS."
* In the case of infectious diseases, the "infectious agents multiply exponentially in susceptible hosts until stopped by immunity." The victim becomes ill within a few days or weeks. The "AIDS-defined diseases" do not follow this pattern.
* After infection with HIV, the immune system neutralizes the virus, creating antibodies. The presence of antibodies indicate successful neutralization or immunity. "Once stopped by immunity, conventional viruses and microbes are no longer pathogenic. There is no reason to believe that a neutralized virus can cause a disease five or ten years later. "...low pathogenicity by a neutralized virus has never been experimentally proven. The "AIDS-defined diseases" follow the pattern of cumulative build-up of toxins, "[f]or example, lung cancer and emphysema are 'acquired' only after 10-20 years of smoking, and liver cirrhosis is 'acquired' only after 10-20 years of alcoholism."
* The "AIDS-defined diseases" are all incompatible with the classical criteria of infectious disease. For example, HIV is not present in all AIDS patients - there are several thousand AIDS patients with no HIV. "...AIDS does not meet even one of the classical criteria of infectious disease." (Koch's postulates.)
* "Since on average only 0.1% (1 out of 500 to 3000) of T-cells are ever infected by HIV in AIDS patients, but at least 3% of all T-cells are regenerated during the two days it takes a retrovirus to infect a cell, HIV could never kill enough T-cells to cause immunodeficiency. Thus even if HIV killed every infected T-cell, it could deplete T-cells only at 1/30 of their normal rate of regeneration, let alone activated regeneration. The odds of HIV causing T-cell deficiency would be the same as those of a bicycle rider trying to catch up with a jet airplane."
* "...[T]here are over 40-times more HIV-infected leukocytes in many healthy HIV carriers than in AIDS patients with fatal AIDS."
* "...[T]here is no trace of HIV in any Kaposi's sarcomas and there is no HIV in neurons of patients with dementia, because of the generic inability of retroviruses to infect nondividing cells like neurons."
* All the "AIDS-defined diseases" occur in the absence of HIV. This is very strong evidence that something other than HIV causes them, and that the presence or absence of HIV is irrelevant to these diseases.
* "Leading AIDS researchers acknowledge that correlations are the only support for the virus-AIDS hypothesis." But correlation does not prove causation. The fact that the "AIDS-defined diseases" occur in the absence of HIV, and HIV occurs in the absence of the "AIDS-defined diseases," strongly suggest that the correlation is irrelevant.
* In fact, the alleged correlation with HIV is not a correlation with HIV at all, but with HIV antibodies, the presence of which indicates that the immune system has successfully neutralized the HIV. "Natural antiviral antibodies, or vaccination, against HIV - which completely neutralize HIV to virtually undetectable levels - are consistently diagnosed in AIDS patients with the 'AIDS test.'"
* No exceptions have so far been found in virology to the rule that the presence of antibodies indicates that the virus has been neutralized and rendered harmless.
* In practically every human cell there are between 100 and 150 chronically latent human retroviruses and parasites. None of these "are fatal and nearly all are harmless to a normal immune system."
* The HIV virus has existed in America for a long time - maybe centuries or longer. "Ever since antibodies against HIV were first detected by the 'AIDS test' in 1985, the number of antibody-positive Americans has been fixed at a constant population of 1 million, or 0.4%." This is an infallible indication that HIV is not new and has been around for a long time. [HIV has been found in frozen blood samples dating back to at least 1959.]
* Clinical studies indicate that transmission of AIDS occurs in the order of once in every 1000 sexual contacts. No virus could survive if it depended on such inefficient transmission. Instead, transmission from mother to child is estimated to occur 13-50% of the time. [Rock Hudson's lover, Marc Christian, survived an estimated 600 unprotected sexual encounters with the infected Hudson without contracting HIV or any illness.]
* Generally, proponents of the virus-AIDS hypothesis claim that HIV attacks the immune system, causing immunodeficiency, which leaves the body more or less helpless against AIDS disease. "However, immunodeficiency is not a common denominator of all AIDS diseases. About 38% of all AIDS diseases, i.e. dementia, wasting disease, Kaposi's sarcoma and lymphoma are neither caused by, nor necessarily associated with, immunodeficiency."
* Generally, proponents of the virus-AIDS hypothesis claim that HIV kills T-cells. However, there is no evidence for this assumption. "The hallmark of retrovirus replication is to convert the viral RNA into DNA and to deliberately integrate this DNA as a parasite gene into the cellular DNA. This process of integration depends on mitosis [cell division] to succeed, rather than on cell death." In other words, for HIV to survive, the cells it infects have to survive. "HIV, like all other retroviruses, does not specifically infect T-cells. It also infects monocytes, epithelial cells, B-cells, glial cells and macrophages, etc. and none of these are killed by HIV."
* Some proponents of the virus-AIDS hypothesis claim that HIV is so deadly because it mutates endlessly into new variations, with which the immune system can't "catch up." "...[T]here is no precedent for an immune system that has been able to neutralize a virus completely and is then unable to catch up with an occasional subsequent mutation. If viruses in general could evade the immune system by mutation, the immune system would be a useless burden to the host... [A]ntigenically new variants of HIV have never been observed in American and European AIDS patients..."
* Some proponents of the virus-AIDS hypothesis claim that HIV changes infected cells so they export protein toxins, causing diseases like Kaposi's sarcoma and dementia. "By contrast, all other known bacterial, animal and human viruses, including retroviruses, are only able to kill those cells they infect, because viruses are manufactured inside cells and would not benefit from proteins released to uninfected cells."
* Ryan White was a hemophiliac who died from unstoppable internal bleeding. He took AZT which probably hastened his death. There is no evidence that he died from HIV.
* Kimberley Bergalis took AZT "until she died in December 1991 with weight loss (15 kg), hair loss, uncontrollable candidiasis, anemia and muscle atrophy (requiring a wheelchair) - the symptoms of chronic AZT toxicity... [T]he assumption that Bergalis died from HIV is pure speculation."
Actually Arthur, chimpanzees are used as the animal model for this disease and will develop AIDS after infection with HIV (satisfying the rest of Koch's postulates btw). What's interesting about the claim is the time line given - nine years. This could easily be true as it consistently takes about ten years for the serious health effects of an HIV infection to start being noticed. It was a brilliant piece of manipulation to try and draw a false conclusion from solid scientific data.ArthurWilborn said:* Over 150 chimpanzees have been infected with HIV by the National Institutes of Health during the past nine years. All are still healthy.
Diseases work differently in different species. Come on, man, this is third-grade biology.
Aught3 said:Actually Arthur, chimpanzees are used as the animal model for this disease and will develop AIDS after infection with HIV (satisfying the rest of Koch's postulates btw). What's interesting about the claim is the time line given - nine years. This could easily be true as it consistently takes about ten years for the serious health effects of an HIV infection to start being noticed. It was a brilliant piece of manipulation to try and draw a false conclusion from solid scientific data.ArthurWilborn said:* Over 150 chimpanzees have been infected with HIV by the National Institutes of Health during the past nine years. All are still healthy.
Diseases work differently in different species. Come on, man, this is third-grade biology.
No, but I can read.khronikos said:And then of course you go above and beyond this to compute your own theory as to why it takes 10 years. Mmkay there guy. You work for John Hopkins I take it?
Heavy metals have already been proven as a WRONG term to use. Of course you wouldn't know this because you people don't bother to read anything in the thread. http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cac ... wq9D9HK86w
Oh yeah, here I'll just whip out these studies that the whole establishment refuses to fund even though multiple people including nobel laureates have directly asked for them to be funded in the name of D's research.
khronikos said:Rabble. Rabble rabble rabble.
(The bolding is mine)khronikos said:I also find it HILARIOUS that you are arguing with a world renowned scientist with a huge list of accolades who sacrificed his career to provide information as to what he thinks and others as well is a theory that has never been corrected. It is still a theory you know. IT HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN!