Re: [A-List] How "scientific" is science?

[Hayduke <hayduke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

on 12/17/2005 10:55 AM, bar@xxxxxxxxxxx at bar@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> No, it is not QED. The proponents of the hiv theory cannot support their
> claims. It is for them to prove their positive assertion not for me to
> disprove a negative. Further I can refer you to many article and papers
> which establish that their claims are completely bogus and The easiest way
> for you to become acquainted with that is to go to the Perth Group website
> and they will lead you to many other links to scientific literature omn
> the subject.  Go there. Look around. Have a read. I gauarentee you will
> find it very, very interesting.

    I did. All of the articles are pre-2000. This is very interesting. Why
is this? Where is the recent research?

    I also read numerous published articles that support the HIV/AIDS
theory. I find them very interesting as well.

    I did as you requested. I cited a published research article on the
physical reality of the HIV virus.

    Science is not about proof. The proponents of the HIV virus theory do
indeed support their theory. If you disagree with them, then you simply
demonstrate that their conclusions are not supported by their evidence and
methodology. This is not "he who has the greatest stack of papers wins."

    Michael

--
Hayduke Speaks!
http://www.calcentral.com/~mlewis
Hayduke Blogs!
http://www.calcentral.com/~mlewis/blogduke.html