http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/harpers-astonishes-the-world-with-the-extent-of-aids-skulduggery.htm Examining scientific claims (eg HIV=AIDS) and dissent in the light of the scientific literature Mon, 08 Sep 2008 14:06:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1 http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/harpers-astonishes-the-world-with-the-extent-of-aids-skulduggery.htm#comment-101 Frank Lusardi Mon, 20 Feb 2006 18:53:30 +0000 http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/harpers-astonishes-the-world-with-the-extent-of-aids-skulduggery.htm#comment-101 There's a brief bio of Celia Farber at the <a href="http://reviewingaids.com/awiki/index.php/Celia_Farber" rel="nofollow">AIDS Wiki</a>. There’s a brief bio of Celia Farber at the AIDS Wiki.

]]> http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/harpers-astonishes-the-world-with-the-extent-of-aids-skulduggery.htm#comment-102 Gos Tue, 21 Feb 2006 17:06:14 +0000 http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/harpers-astonishes-the-world-with-the-extent-of-aids-skulduggery.htm#comment-102 Kudos to Harper's for having the balls to tell the truth, in the face of overwhelming dogma and scaremongering on the part of the AIDS orthodoxy.In some Utopian future, we may have a press that brings the public ALL the facts, and credits us with the intelligence to make up our own minds. Until that day, we have Harper's.--- Gos--- gos@nerosopeningact.com"Nobody here but us heretics..." Kudos to Harper’s for having the balls to tell the truth, in the face of overwhelming dogma and scaremongering on the part of the AIDS orthodoxy.In some Utopian future, we may have a press that brings the public ALL the facts, and credits us with the intelligence to make up our own minds. Until that day, we have Harper’s.— Gos— gos@nerosopeningact.com”Nobody here but us heretics…”

]]> http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/harpers-astonishes-the-world-with-the-extent-of-aids-skulduggery.htm#comment-103 McKiernan Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:37:00 +0000 http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/harpers-astonishes-the-world-with-the-extent-of-aids-skulduggery.htm#comment-103 <em>"The section on Duesberg completes the piece in a way which should leave very little doubt in the reader's mind that he is right, and that the calumny heaped upon his reputation and the refusal to listen to his critique is political, sociological, and emotional in nature, and without scientific merit."</em>Well, that may be wishful thinking as the authoress states some doubt on page 51 near the end of the article:"<em>Regardless of whether Duesberg is right about HIV</em>, his case like Fishbein’s lays bare the political machinery of American science and reveals its reflexive hostility to ideas that challenge the dominant paradigm". “The section on Duesberg completes the piece in a way which should leave very little doubt in the reader’s mind that he is right, and that the calumny heaped upon his reputation and the refusal to listen to his critique is political, sociological, and emotional in nature, and without scientific merit.”Well, that may be wishful thinking as the authoress states some doubt on page 51 near the end of the article:”Regardless of whether Duesberg is right about HIV, his case like Fishbein’s lays bare the political machinery of American science and reveals its reflexive hostility to ideas that challenge the dominant paradigm”.

]]> http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/harpers-astonishes-the-world-with-the-extent-of-aids-skulduggery.htm#comment-104 Robert Houston Thu, 23 Feb 2006 20:04:56 +0000 http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/harpers-astonishes-the-world-with-the-extent-of-aids-skulduggery.htm#comment-104 Come on, now. That's not a statement of doubt but of logic. Ms. Farber is saying correctly that the hostility of American science to challengers is evident and thus applicable in both contingencies: whether the challenger is right or wrong. It is clear from her piece that Dr. Duesberg is a scientist of heroic stature, with a level of intellect, knowledge, rationality and integrity that can't be matched anywhere in conventional AIDS "science" or cancer research. It may have been preferable if the section on Duesberg had come at the beginning (as I understand it did in the orginal manuscript) rather at the end. But in any case it's great to have this highly professional and incisive journalistic revelation of the the AIDS mess upfront and available in the leading magazine of cultured opinion. Celia Farber did a brilliant job. Pulitzer committee please take note! Come on, now. That’s not a statement of doubt but of logic. Ms. Farber is saying correctly that the hostility of American science to challengers is evident and thus applicable in both contingencies: whether the challenger is right or wrong. It is clear from her piece that Dr. Duesberg is a scientist of heroic stature, with a level of intellect, knowledge, rationality and integrity that can’t be matched anywhere in conventional AIDS “science” or cancer research. It may have been preferable if the section on Duesberg had come at the beginning (as I understand it did in the orginal manuscript) rather at the end. But in any case it’s great to have this highly professional and incisive journalistic revelation of the the AIDS mess upfront and available in the leading magazine of cultured opinion. Celia Farber did a brilliant job. Pulitzer committee please take note!

]]> http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/harpers-astonishes-the-world-with-the-extent-of-aids-skulduggery.htm#comment-105 Terry Tue, 28 Feb 2006 02:09:14 +0000 http://www.scienceguardian.com/blog/harpers-astonishes-the-world-with-the-extent-of-aids-skulduggery.htm#comment-105 Good one Harpers. I only wish more mainstream media would expose AIDS inc. and their filthy lies. -Terry Good one Harpers. I only wish more mainstream media would expose AIDS inc. and their filthy lies.
-Terry

]]>