Science Guardian

Ranging from fulsome praise to scorn and derision, here is a selection of reactions and responses to this blog, none of them solicited in any way:

Anthony, I’ve just visited Science Guardian, and am enormously impressed. It’s beautiful and powerful. I especially liked your thorough analysis of Montagnier’s statements. You really brought out the implications. – John Lauritsen, pioneering critic and author of four of the most sharply analytical books on the HIV/AIDS claim, its drug studies, and its needless and damaging medications (see references in Blogroll on right).

It is undoubtedly the best website on the internet, bar none. I use it in my correspondence as a reference and authority in making a point. I hope nothing deters you. You have, as far as I’m concerned, the best and finest blog on the Internet. It is vitally needed. - Douglas Bishop, senior activist, San Diego HEAL.

It is in matters of common concerns that the Internet shines. There are a few sites, not many, but a few, where one can find better guidance than from all the official sites. Your blog leads the way. Congratulations! – Gabor Bartha, retired teacher.

I read your www.NewAIDSReview.com site and I am genuinely taken aback by how exquisitely you write. I am envious. The clarity of your writings and your turns of phrase are superb. It is FANTASTIC!. I read every word of your 66 pages….and will do so again. There were many human and social issues I hadn’t understood the nuances of…thanks for clarifying them. – George Miklos, Nature Biotechnology reviewer and international corporate biotech investment consultant.

“An AIDS denialist/conspiracy theorist site that is influential in those circles …The NAR articles are generally well enough written to accurately reflect the dangers of AIDS denialist sites in their capacity to mislead and hurt innocent, vulnerable people, particularly those infected with HIV who are seeking answers and information about what choices to make. It seems worth alerting AIDS health care professionals to the existence of the NAR site, so that they can take steps to counter its misleading (although generally well presented) information…..(The author is) much smarter and more dignified (than others) and maintains the NAR site to a standard that is satirical but generally not abusive and offensive (you should not, however, interpret this comment as meaning I have ANY respect for his opinions, which are based on misunderstandings about HIV science).” – John P Moore, Joan and Sanford I. Weill Medical College, Cornell University

Good! An excellently entertaining and biting series of articles about AIDS science. You’ve realised that, seeing as the richest people on the planet, by and large, tend to be entertainers rather than educators, to educate effectively we must do so entertainingly, which you are doing. Your URL will be added to my list of URL’s that I include on dissident AIDS material I distribute. Keep up the good work. We need people with close connections to the inside of science to help reveal what’s going on and explain things to the general public. - Mike Hersee, activist, UK.

One can only hope defense lawyer Borick appeals the case. If he does, I see no better anchor man and strategic consultant for his reinforced expert team than the laser sharp host of this gold medallion cutting edge science blog. - Claus Jensen, well informed AIDS science critic.

Thank God for your existence! -Serge Lang, Yale professor and establishment critic and challenger of officials, editors, academics and scientists for hypocritical inaccuracy of public statements and abdication of professional and public responsibility.

Heroic in analyzing and challenging paradigms, and a writing talent without peer in this nation, often very funny and sometimes extraordinarily elegant, with a breathtaking poetic insight approaching the level of classical greatness. - Robert Houston, Independent researcher/writer in science and medicine in New York City.

Brilliant. - Harvey Bialy, editor of You Bet Your Life at Barnesworld, author of “Oncogenes, Aneuploidy and AIDS: A Scientific Life and Times of Peter H. Duesberg” (North Atlantic, 2004), and founding science editor Nature Biotechnology.

Your blog is quite admirable. - Henry Bauer, Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Scientific Exploration (http://www.scientificexploration.org/), Dean Emeritus of Arts & Sciences, Professor Emeritus of Chemistry & Science Studies, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University (Virginia Tech), author of The Origin, Persistence and Failings of HIV/AIDS Theory, (McFarland, 2007).

Deserving of censure for it’s (sic) relentless promotion of pseudoscience in AIDS denial. - AIDSTruth.org, anti-paradigm critic web site run by John P. Moore, AIDS microbicide researcher at Weill-Cornell, New York City.

A laughably inept deconstruction of (the) contents that happened when Anthony Liversidge attempted to interpret the meaning of one of my earlier papers on his Blog. All that proved to me was that the denialists were even more ignorant of the meaning of peer-reviewed science than I had ever suspected…Still, if the denialists and conspiracy theorists want to waste their time on attempts to understand my papers, it’s at least a harmless activity that doesn’t kill vulnerable people, so they’re welcome to continue. (Comment on Aetiology thread at Mbeki still in denial) – John P. Moore, AIDS microbicide researcher at Weill-Cornell

A puerile Blog, New AIDS Review, devoted to AIDS denialism and other related conspiracy theories. His deadly rival, a person he loathes more than he hates any AIDS scientist, is Harvey Bialy, whose own Blog was much more popular and better written then his own. Liversidge/Baloney likes to think of himself as some kind of civilized, Anglo aristo type, but in reality he’s just Bialy-lite, posting the same material only with less humor and even sillier scientific content. He reserves a special place of hatred in his heart for the AIDS Truthies, because they listed Bialy and not him on their “Who are the denialists page”. He took this to be a huge personal slight. Pathetic when you stop to think about it – the price of a big ego attached to a small brain I guess. - Anonymous ‘Truthseeker’ (not AL) on Aetiology thread at Mbeki still in denial) ((Not true – we admire Dr Harvey Bialy for his brilliant and entertaining critiques of AIDS and cancer research at Nature Biotechnology and at You Bet Your Life blog, which he edited. He is also the author of an impeccably witty account of the distinguished Peter Duesberg’s life in science. – Ed.))

On another subject, “Molecular Spartacus Claw” speculated about why Anthony Liversidge is not listed on AIDS Truth’s “Who are the denialists page”. We never for a moment considering adding him. Although he resembles Bialy in running a conspiracy theory/AIDS denialist Blog, it’s not particularly influential even in denialist circles. Moreover, Liversidge has no scientific training (accounting for the asinine content of what he posts), unlike Bialy who was able to use his degrees to persuade a few gullible journalists that he knew what he was talking about. Recording the reality about Bialy on AIDS Truth was therefore useful to show journalists who in fact they were dealing with; that situation would never arise with Liversidge. After all, if we listed Liversidge, we’d pretty much also have to list Michael Geiger…… One has to draw a line somewhere! - John P. Moore, AIDS microbicide researcher at Weill-Cornell

Truthseeker, aka Anthony Liversidge, posts his usual pretentious drivel to try to advertize his own blog which is remarkable only for the stupidity of the discussions about science that take place there – ‘LieDetector’, commentator on Aetiology thread at Mbeki still in denial)

I never bothered reading what Liversidge wrote (for much the same reason as I don’t feel the need to stick my finger into a pile of manure to know what it is) – John P. Moore, AIDS microbicide researcher at Weill-Cornell, an editor of AidsTruth.org

Anthony Liversidge even goes so far to claim that his total lack of scientific training somehow puts him in a better position to understand the science than people who do have extensive training and research experience. Somehow ignorance becomes a virtue. The hubris is staggering. - Chris Noble, Australian computer programmer

But the majority of the HIV/AIDS denialists are merely living embodiments of the old adage “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing”. They know a little about science (actually, in Liversidge’s case, next to nothing) and think that means they are qualified to understand research publications and comment on them. It’s ludicrous of course, pathetically so. But unlike the harmless buffoonery of the 9/11 conspiracy nutters, the dangerous consequence of the AIDS denialist conspiracy is that these people cause the death of innocent people. That’s an important difference, and it underlies why we must continue to fight the AIDS denialists (in the real world, of course). There’s not a credible scientist among the lot of them, essentially as a point of definition, and the non-scientists do not know that they do not know what they are talking about, the Kruger-Denning effect in action! - John P. Moore, AIDS microbicide researcher at Weill-Cornell, an editor of AidsTruth.org

I don’t pretend that being ignorant is an advantage. I don’t pretend that “common sense” is sufficient. Yet this is exactly what Anthony Liversidge and other Denialists do. Liversidge even goes further to make the absurd and arrogant claim that he can understand a scientist’s papers better than the scientist himself. This represents a delusion of competence that is inversely proportional to his actual level of understanding.- Chris Noble, Australian computer programmer

It was painfully obvious that Denialists will go to incredible lengths to avoid admitting any mistake. Liversidge and fellow denialists fought tooth and nail before they, or at least a portion of them, finally admitted that Duesberg had made a mistake. Of course the mistake became “trivial” in the process of admitting the mistake. – Chris Noble, Australian computer programmer

I don’t read his Blog, but I was emailed his attempt to analyze the Klasse/Moore paper on gp120 concentrations in plasma, etc. It was pathetic. At one point I actually burst out laughing at the sheer stupidity of what passes for Liversidge’s “thinking” on the science that underlies this paper. A reasonable analogy would be if I attempted to deconstruct the meaning behind a poem written in Swahili, a language and a subject with which I have no familiarity at all. Of course I would never do that, because the Kruger-Denning effect ((that the stupid do not realise they are stupid – Ed.)) doesn’t apply to me. As well as “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing”, another adage comes to mind: “There’s no fool like an old fool”. – John P. Moore, AIDS microbicide researcher at Weill-Cornell, an editor of AidsTruth.org

Although in Liversidge’s case, it would be easier if he just wrote “I am insane, and here’s the proof”. Incidentally, have you and Chris noted the delusion of grandeur associated with his use of “The Royal We” when referring to himself. There’s yet more personal pathology there to be deconstructed if anyone could be bothered…- John P. Moore, AIDS microbicide researcher at Weill-Cornell, an editor of AidsTruth.org

Bravo Truthseeker sir! – ‘Yello’ (Commenter here)

I’m a regular reader of your work, Truthseeker. Forgive my poor english. I think that most of the people out there know, deep inside, that something isn’t right with this HIV=AIDS ‘truth’. On the other hand, probably most people don’t feel confortable questioning this theory in front of a medical doctor. Anyway, I was surprised to see that when I told my friends and parents about the most blatant inconsistencies of this HIV=AIDS theory, all said something like ‘now that I think about it, it makes sense’. But they found it hard to believe that our medical system would play such a ‘prank’ on us all for so long by condemning us to death with useless antibody tests and toxic (chemotherapy turned anti-retroviral) drugs. Most don’t really know that AZT WAS inicially intended to be another killer chemotherapy drug. And many other things. So I guess that these HIV=AIDS defenders are trying to prevent a worldwide riot right now. The failings of the theory are so blatant that even a layman could point them out without having to do much research and the HIV=AIDS acolytes can only rely on the unbelievable dimension of the ‘prank’ they are playing for their survival. After all, ‘doctors are here to take care of us, how could they do this to us?’ most people think. I can’t wait to see when the faeces hit the ventilator. Heads are going to roll. Keep up the good work!
I’ve managed to find some time and read part of the stuff you showed me, Truthseeker. And after reading some of the stuff, I can’t help to feel overwhelmed with relief and revolt. I can’t help to imagine what would happen to my life if I was tested positive (never happened, thank God!), knowing that past and present circumstances made that result impossible, and was unaware of all this information. What would the emotional impact do to me? I imagine if that happened, I had to carry the burden of premature, slow and painful death with the probability of having condemned others to the same death as well. All of this because of a single unreliable test (here in Portugal, all you get is a single ELISA and probably a WB. I still need to confirm that), that doesn’t even detect the virus. I can only imagine what others, unaware of this information, go through when they get tested and get positive. What I find even more disturbing is that doctors don’t even inform people about this. They don’t even say ‘ If I were you, I wouldn’t worry about those tests. It is very likely that you are ok. There are a lot of other conditions that interfere with HIV-tests. For example’¦’. Are they even aware of the flaws of HIV-tests?
What I feel now is that my trust in our healthcare system is at an all-time low. If people start asking questions and start doing their own research and become aware of the other side of this story, public trust on healthcare will be broken. Probably permanently. Stories of people that got their carreers and lives destroyed because of a wrong diagnosis will come to come to the top. And then heads will roll. It is the worldwide (or nationwide) riot that I mentioned earlier.
But this is the worst-case scenario. Politicians and doctors will find a way to crawl out of this one with minimal injury, for sure. And what is being done to the african people is scandalous. I would like to know if a hard-core, dissident-hating, HIV=AIDS crusader would really bet his/her life on a positive HIV diagnosis’¦ Rezaf, 26, chemist doing research on vanadium organomettalic catalysts in Lisbon.

Truthseeker has presented a superb analysis of the many misrepresentations in Smith and Novello’s propaganda piece on ‘HIV Denial in the Internet Era.’ - Robert Houston, independent science and medicine researcher/writer.

“Superior wit and sense of humour.”- Chris Noble, on another site (Aetiology), referring to the blogger, as in “You really are slimy. I have stated exactly what I meant several times I have not “conceded” that “AZT is a fatal poison if given to weakened people”. You have a serious problem. You just can’t bring yourself to be honest. This continual twisting and distortion, these stupid word games. I gather these are meant to highlight your superior wit and sense of humour. They don’t. They just reveal your fundamental dishonesty. I wrote that AZT has serious and potentially fatal side effects and has only been demonstrated to have short term benefits in advanced HIV disease.”