THE CO DISCOVERER OF HIV Prof. Luc Montagnier's Extended House of Numbers

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
When looking at conspiracy theories, it is *extremely* important to find out where they started. Conspiracy nuts, so critical of every kind of information except their own, never do that. It is so important to know, because conspiracy theories are rarely harmless, those originally propagating them rarely believe in them, and they always serve some ulterior purpose, closely related to the ideology of those who start them. The simple fact of the matter is that, depending on what kind of conspiracy theory it is, they nearly all start in the same place[/QUOTE]

Excellent summation of the mentality.
But labeling every viewpoint that goes against the grain as a conspiracy theory is an equally dangerous precedent. It assumes that every government and every corporation has told the truth about every issue that remains under debate.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, but I think that such views as posted by the topic starter definitely qualify as conspiracy theories. There is, naturally, a great grey divide between the plausible and the far-out, and it can often be difficult to discern the outrageous from the unconventional, and so we should indeed be careful in applying the label 'conspiracy theory'.

Incidentally, what I find very interesting is the way evidence (or the lack thereof) is treated in conspiracy theories: the absence of evidence in support of the theory is regarded as clear proof of a cover-up, whereas any present evidence against it is also considered evidence of a cover-up. That is an interesting position from a hermeneutical point of view.

[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
the absence of evidence in support of the theory is regarded as clear proof of a cover-up, whereas any present evidence against it is also considered evidence of a cover-up[/QUOTE]
And that's just it. That means one cannot defend oneself with a rebuttal. The rebuttal means "of course they considered our theory, which makes us right." It just defies logic, and sounds more self-aggrandizing than anything.

"the absence of evidence in support of the theory "

WHEN PEOPLES LIVES ARE AT STAKE
THEORY IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH

MEDICINE IS NOT MEANT TO WORK BY THEORY

And the evidence proves the theory wrong.
yet it was not a theory in any case it was fraud.

for true the orIginator of "the theory", states that hiv can be recovered from and is not fatal.

Yet the fraudster who bypassed all legal channels, with the aid and abettance of the corrupt in power at the time, made millions by his toxic cancer drug that had once been refused as too toxic, prior to his hijacking the HIV THEORY, to his own gain and fame, and to the loss of life for millions.

"MEDICINE IS NOT MEANT TO WORK BY THEORY"

The research & development process certainly DOES involve some level of theory depending on the type of medicine and cure being aimed for, you fool

I guess that this is another case of a person not understanding what "theory" means. Rather like Treasure Moment, who was convinced that "music theory" meant "draconic laws prohibiting you from doing anything the way you want to".

Yeah. You could really help yourself by checking on this site here, Medusa.

http://www.notjustatheory.com/

It explains the common misconception concerning the word 'theory'. In a nutshell, in scientific circles it's completely different from how we treat the word 'theory' in our day-to-day vernacular.

It explains the common misconception concerning the word 'theory'. In a nutshell, in scientific circles it's completely different from how we treat the word 'theory' in our vernacular.

================

I must be the only person who uses theory correctly in day-to-day use then?

It's very possible!

[QUOTE] [b]emrabt wrote:[/b]
It explains the common misconception concerning the word 'theory'. In a nutshell, in scientific circles it's completely different from how we treat the word 'theory' in our vernacular.
================
I must be the only person who uses theory correctly in day-to-day use then?[/QUOTE]
peer review and retesting of claims (THEORIES) in a laboratory, to see if the results are the same, is needed in ethical medicine/ science.
Infact it is THE LAW.
This was not the case wth HIV AIDS , THE BROKE THE LAW AND ALL ETHICAL MEDICAL PRACTICE AND USED THE MEDIA AND POLITICIONS to promote their theory and make use and money out of their toxic drug.
This is the root of the problem, and the means by which the fraud was achieved.
aids IS also A CATCH ALL FRAUD
For there was and has been for years and years, plenty of scientifically based evidence, for every single disease
the fraudsters claimed were caused by aids.
But they in their fraud ignored the known science,
by claiming vitually all known disease was the result of HIV AIDS
The list of AIDS diseases is ever changing and being added too
yet all the diseases and conditions already have known causes and were already known by medical science.
AIDS IS NOT A DISEASE
IT IS CONDITION CAUSED BY TOXIC DRUGS IN REGARDS TO THE AIDS HOAX
And it is a condition that was and is already known by medical science before anyone thought of using
it to murder millions with by protraying it as a disease.
They simply induced the condition of immune deficiency through handing out TOXINS IN TOXIC DRUGS WHICH KILLED T CELLS IN THE HUMAN BODY and mad the recipient unable to fight any disease.
They could only go ahead with it by the use of Fraud though
using up the Hiv route which is and never was proven
for the test for hiv is a fraud in itself
As the labelling of the test states it cannot be used to diagnose hiv infection
and HIV was never put through the loops of usual scientific and medical ethical rules.
IT WAS SIMPLY ANNOUNCED AT A MEDIA PRESS CONFERENCE
BY A CONMAN WHO WANTED TO SELL HIS ONCE REJECTED TOXIC DRUG, A DRUG HE KNEW FULL WELL WOULD DESTROY THE BODIES IMMUNE SYSTEM- and so case immune deficiency
commonly known as AIDS but it is aquired not by infection but by the drugs fraudulantly marketed to cure HIV
which does not cause AIDS!!
HIV IS PROVEN TO NOT CAUSE AIDS
because if it did
everyone would become immune deficient who was said to have it
AND they would go on to develop so called AIDS and DIE.
but they dont!
Only those given the toxic immune stystem destroying AIDS DRUGS
GET IMMUNE DEFIECIENCY AND EVENTUALLY DIE FROM IMMUNE DEFICIENCY which allows every disease known to man to kill them.

If a vaccine for HIV was created, everyone who had the vaccine would then test positive for HIV on the non-specific antibody tests now in use.
HIV IS NOT SCIENCE ITS BULLSHIT

So, in short,
* you don't know how the human immune system works
* you don't understand the mechanics of viruses
* you haven't got a clue what "theory" means, because "peer review" and "theory" are unrelated concepts
* you are too lazy to do any research for yourself, instead you just parrot misinterpretations of YouTube videos.

How old are you, Medusa? Because if the answer is >14, you should be in a mental hospital.

If you'd even just paid attention to the videos you *yourself* posted, Medusa, you'd know that Montagnier does *not*, *ever* claim that AIDS is not caused by HIV.

A direct quote by Montagnier: "Montagnier said he was "surprised" that Robert Gallo was not also recognized by the Nobel Committee: "It was important to prove that HIV was the cause of AIDS, and Gallo had a very important role in that. I'm very sorry for Robert Gallo.""

why do you think Montagneirs saying anything?
Dont you realise he is only doing this to cover his guilt?
why else has he now come out and said HIV does not lead to aids and can be recovered from with a good diet?
he is guilty as hell about it all yet still wants to appear "respectable" so as not to lose his funding, so he praises Galo
tell me how the hell can he hosenstly praise galo
now he has said he bleives HIV CAN BE RECOVERED FROM LIKE A SILMPLE FLU WITH THE RIGHT BASIC HEALTH STANDARDS DIET ETC?
How can he with a straight face say anything good about Galo
When he knows galo has made his name claiming it KILLS PEOPLE>
AND HAS SOLD HIS TOXIC T CELL KILLING DRUG For YEARS
if HE KNOWS ITS A LIE!!
HE SAYS GALO'S LIE IS A LIE IN THE INTERVIEW!!
Nobel Loreate and Discoverer of ''HIV'', Luc Montagnier: The Body Can Naturally Get Rid of ''HIV''
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbhAXrd0MU0
THATS PROOF ENOUGH OF HIS FALSE FLATTERING OF GALLO!
HE CANT HONESTLY SAY GALLO DERSERVES A PEACE PRIZE! IF HE THINKS HE IS AN INCOMPETENT IDIOT WITH THE BLOOD OF MILLIONS ON HIS HANDS
MORE LIKE DESERVING OF A FRIGGING OSCAR MAYBE !
but what he says direcrlty contradicts the gallo lie!
so if two such men oppose each others findings how can they both think eachother deserve their award!
BETTER THINK BEFORE YOU PUT YOUR FOOT UP YOUR ARSE AGAIN
And scrape that Jesuit shite off your foot while your at it.

and are you too thick to work out what
Montagniers is doing!

HE KNOWS FULL WELL
HIV WONT DO A DAMN THING TO YOU

WHY ELSE DOES HE SAYS ITS LIKE A SIMPLE FLU
AND CAN BE EASILY RECOVERED FROM

BECAUSE HE KNOWS
ITS ALL BULLSHIT

THAT'S WHY

ITS ALL FOR HIS PERSONAL DAMAGE CONTROL

HE SEES THE TIDE IS TURNING
HE KNOWS THE SCAM IS EXPOSED
HE WANTS TO SAVE HIS OWN ASS
SOWMHOW

AND MARK MY WORDS YOU PEICES OF SHIT
MONITERING THIS

YOUR DAY IS DONE


YOU ARE TOTALY FUCKED

YOU MURDERING PEICES OF SHIT

ITS OVER FOR YOU.