BlueStar 0 Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 (edited) http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250281,00.html http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-203/0...27440174631.htm Google's take on it is quite funny http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&saf...amp;btnG=Search Edited February 8, 2007 by BlueStar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 8973 Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Gambia got there first tbh. http://www.toontastic.net/forum/index.php?...&hl=gambian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newcastlebroon 0 Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250281,00.html http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-203/0...27440174631.htm Google's take on it is quite funny http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&saf...amp;btnG=Search ahhhhhhhh bless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 14029 Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Hanging gays has served them pretty well so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 8973 Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 I thought you liked your gays well hung? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 14029 Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 (although I do question whether "rimshot" is the best of smileys to use here...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 (although I do question whether "rimshot" is the best of smileys to use here...) Hole-ly appropriate tbqf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 8973 Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 (although I do question whether "rimshot" is the best of smileys to use here...) I thought it was apt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Well there is still persistant doubt that it is caused by HIV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 No there isnt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Steve_Howey 0 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. ??? source?!?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. ??? source?!?!? Just put HIV doesn't cause aids into google....100's of pages will come up. There is doubt around the whole aids/hiv issue since the early 90's. Not saying I beleive it, but it is interesting how thw WHO and drugs companies have steamrollered all the contradictory research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Steve_Howey 0 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. ??? source?!?!? Just put HIV doesn't cause aids into google....100's of pages will come up. There is doubt around the whole aids/hiv issue since the early 90's. Not saying I beleive it, but it is interesting how thw WHO and drugs companies have steamrollered all the contradictory research. would any of this be credible research? I only say this as I'm pretty sure if you Google 'moon landings faked', you get 100's of pages... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. ??? source?!?!? Just put HIV doesn't cause aids into google....100's of pages will come up. There is doubt around the whole aids/hiv issue since the early 90's. Not saying I beleive it, but it is interesting how thw WHO and drugs companies have steamrollered all the contradictory research. would any of this be credible research? I only say this as I'm pretty sure if you Google 'moon landings faked', you get 100's of pages... Well you should see the carefully constrcted parameters of what constitutes aids then - you couldn't make it up. HIV fails many long standing scientific tests that constitute what a disease causing virus is. For instance monkeys have been injected for 20 years with live HIV and something like 9/10 never develop aids. Ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar 0 Posted February 9, 2007 Author Share Posted February 9, 2007 (edited) No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. ??? source?!?!? It's another pet project of internet kooks, missiles brought down the WTC, world leaders are lizard men, the global warming myth is a eurotrash conspiracy to bring down the US, AIDS isn't caused by HIV and cannot infect straight people who don't use drugs (Although books pointing this out like "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS" are viciously suppressed by by a politically correct conspiracy) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_reappraisal The majority of the scientific community consider that the AIDS dissident arguments are the result of cherry-picking of scientific data[1] as dissidents selectively ignore evidence in favour of HIV's role in AIDS and endanger the public health by dissuading people from utilizing proven treatments.[2][3] Edited February 9, 2007 by BlueStar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 (edited) No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. ??? source?!?!? It's another pet project of internet kooks, missiles brought down the WTC, world leaders are lizard men, the global warming myth is a eurotrash conspiracy to bring down the US, AIDS isn't caused by HIV and cannot infect straight people who don't use drugs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_reappraisal The majority of the scientific community consider that the AIDS dissident arguments are the result of cherry-picking of scientific data[1] as dissidents selectively ignore evidence in favour of HIV's role in AIDS and endanger the public health by dissuading people from utilizing proven treatments.[2][3] This is the main dissentor. Some internet geek obviously: Peter H. Duesberg Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA Born: December 2, 1936 http://www.duesberg.com/ Edited February 9, 2007 by Parky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Steve_Howey 0 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. ??? source?!?!? Just put HIV doesn't cause aids into google....100's of pages will come up. There is doubt around the whole aids/hiv issue since the early 90's. Not saying I beleive it, but it is interesting how thw WHO and drugs companies have steamrollered all the contradictory research. would any of this be credible research? I only say this as I'm pretty sure if you Google 'moon landings faked', you get 100's of pages... Well you should see the carefully constrcted parameters of what constitutes aids then - you couldn't make it up. HIV fails many long standing scientific tests that constitute what a disease causing virus is. For instance monkeys have been injected for 20 years with live HIV and something like 9/10 never develop aids. Ever. part of the reason why a cure is so far off is that HIV isn't a readily identifiable disease. It has many many iterations and mutations IIRC. Alos, it is these non-progressing HIV cases that are being studied for some vaccine leads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. ??? source?!?!? Just put HIV doesn't cause aids into google....100's of pages will come up. There is doubt around the whole aids/hiv issue since the early 90's. Not saying I beleive it, but it is interesting how thw WHO and drugs companies have steamrollered all the contradictory research. would any of this be credible research? I only say this as I'm pretty sure if you Google 'moon landings faked', you get 100's of pages... Well you should see the carefully constrcted parameters of what constitutes aids then - you couldn't make it up. HIV fails many long standing scientific tests that constitute what a disease causing virus is. For instance monkeys have been injected for 20 years with live HIV and something like 9/10 never develop aids. Ever. part of the reason why a cure is so far off is that HIV isn't a readily identifiable disease. It has many many iterations and mutations IIRC. Alos, it is these non-progressing HIV cases that are being studied for some vaccine leads. HIV is an old virus and has been around for 100's of years....Why it would suddenly start giving people 'aids' is part of the mystery I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Steve_Howey 0 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. ??? source?!?!? Just put HIV doesn't cause aids into google....100's of pages will come up. There is doubt around the whole aids/hiv issue since the early 90's. Not saying I beleive it, but it is interesting how thw WHO and drugs companies have steamrollered all the contradictory research. would any of this be credible research? I only say this as I'm pretty sure if you Google 'moon landings faked', you get 100's of pages... Well you should see the carefully constrcted parameters of what constitutes aids then - you couldn't make it up. HIV fails many long standing scientific tests that constitute what a disease causing virus is. For instance monkeys have been injected for 20 years with live HIV and something like 9/10 never develop aids. Ever. part of the reason why a cure is so far off is that HIV isn't a readily identifiable disease. It has many many iterations and mutations IIRC. Alos, it is these non-progressing HIV cases that are being studied for some vaccine leads. HIV is an old virus and has been around for 100's of years....Why it would suddenly start giving people 'aids' is part of the mystery I agree. IIRC HIV the monkey version is old. It was never present in humans until AIDS was noticed, the transition from monkeys to humans is thought to be from tribesmen eating monkeys? or having sex with them (all of this is from memory before someone starts pulling me up on it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17704 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. ??? source?!?!? Just put HIV doesn't cause aids into google....100's of pages will come up. There is doubt around the whole aids/hiv issue since the early 90's. Not saying I beleive it, but it is interesting how thw WHO and drugs companies have steamrollered all the contradictory research. would any of this be credible research? I only say this as I'm pretty sure if you Google 'moon landings faked', you get 100's of pages... Well you should see the carefully constrcted parameters of what constitutes aids then - you couldn't make it up. HIV fails many long standing scientific tests that constitute what a disease causing virus is. For instance monkeys have been injected for 20 years with live HIV and something like 9/10 never develop aids. Ever. part of the reason why a cure is so far off is that HIV isn't a readily identifiable disease. It has many many iterations and mutations IIRC. Alos, it is these non-progressing HIV cases that are being studied for some vaccine leads. HIV is an old virus and has been around for 100's of years....Why it would suddenly start giving people 'aids' is part of the mystery I agree. IIRC HIV the monkey version is old. It was never present in humans until AIDS was noticed, the transition from monkeys to humans is thought to be from tribesmen eating monkeys? or having sex with them (all of this is from memory before someone starts pulling me up on it) Humans getting aid from monkeys is utter cobblers for a start. Closer would be the high use of anti-biotics combined with the gay lifestyle. It has been suggested that the very active sections of the gay community who 'also' use high doses of various anti-biotics to counter the 'results' of this lifestyle (especially in the 90's) MAY have mutated their immune system to exhibit 'aids like' symptoms. This is one theory that has been passed over as it wasn't deemed politically palatable. Of course in fairness there are different types of aids as 'they say' now. The African version behaves totally differently as infection rates and footprint shows it infects men and women equally as against the Western conterpart which is still found predominantly in males. 90% in some areas. The whole HIV aids thing is so wracked with politics and money for Africa, it is difficult IMO for dissenting research (and there are dissenting voices from A grade scientists) to gain a foothold in the public domain. I have no firm opionon but as they have got nowhere in 20 years with HIV perhaps they should look elsewhere. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...st_uids=1349680 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Does Parky actually believe in scientific reasoning when it suits his argument then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Does Parky actually believe in scientific reasoning when it suits his argument then? Perhaps I have been less than fair with 'science' in the past Alexus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Steve_Howey 0 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 No there isnt. 15 to 20% of people with 'AIDS' have no presence of HIV. ??? source?!?!? Just put HIV doesn't cause aids into google....100's of pages will come up. There is doubt around the whole aids/hiv issue since the early 90's. Not saying I beleive it, but it is interesting how thw WHO and drugs companies have steamrollered all the contradictory research. would any of this be credible research? I only say this as I'm pretty sure if you Google 'moon landings faked', you get 100's of pages... Well you should see the carefully constrcted parameters of what constitutes aids then - you couldn't make it up. HIV fails many long standing scientific tests that constitute what a disease causing virus is. For instance monkeys have been injected for 20 years with live HIV and something like 9/10 never develop aids. Ever. part of the reason why a cure is so far off is that HIV isn't a readily identifiable disease. It has many many iterations and mutations IIRC. Alos, it is these non-progressing HIV cases that are being studied for some vaccine leads. HIV is an old virus and has been around for 100's of years....Why it would suddenly start giving people 'aids' is part of the mystery I agree. IIRC HIV the monkey version is old. It was never present in humans until AIDS was noticed, the transition from monkeys to humans is thought to be from tribesmen eating monkeys? or having sex with them (all of this is from memory before someone starts pulling me up on it) Humans getting aid from monkeys is utter cobblers for a start. Closer would be the high use of anti-biotics combined with the gay lifestyle. It has been suggested that the very active sections of the gay community who 'also' use high doses of various anti-biotics to counter the 'results' of this lifestyle (especially in the 90's) MAY have mutated their immune system to exhibit 'aids like' symptoms. This is one theory that has been passed over as it wasn't deemed politically palatable. Of course in fairness there are different types of aids as 'they say' now. The African version behaves totally differently as infection rates and footprint shows it infects men and women equally as against the Western conterpart which is still found predominantly in males. 90% in some areas. The whole HIV aids thing is so wracked with politics and money for Africa, it is difficult IMO for dissenting research (and there are dissenting voices from A grade scientists) to gain a foothold in the public domain. I have no firm opionon but as they have got nowhere in 20 years with HIV perhaps they should look elsewhere. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...st_uids=1349680 like I say this is from memory, google aids monkeys and it's 50/50 for and against " The African version behaves totally differently as infection rates and footprint shows it infects men and women equally as against the Western conterpart which is still found predominantly in males. 90% in some areas." -didn't understand this - are you talking AIDs or HIV?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now