I have been waiting quite a few years now for the HIV=AIDS myth to blow up in a public way, and I'm beginning to believe it will continue to be religiously censored by the secularist mainstream media indefinitely.It may be very hard for you to believe the following story of the HIV AIDS myth, but, I promise you, I’m not making this stuff up; I’m neither smart enough nor creative enough to do such a thing. It's all been available for years and years, but it has also been ignored by the SLIMC1 , which is literally owned by the AIDS establishment, but covered by non-mainstream publications like National Review, which is the original source that lit my fire on the topic, several years ago.
The HIV AIDS myth was born of a government pronouncement, and nothing else.
As with many topics discussed herein, within the first ten minutes, historically speaking, of the discovery of AIDS, we had our first crop of intellectual AIDS experts, who knew all there was to know about AIDS, and knew full well the one and only one single cause of it, and, perhaps more importantly, what didn’t cause it. Within the first twenty minutes or so, we had a few other causes (one of which was touted to be ignorance,) a bunch more of non-causes, and a whole lot more experts. Finally after the first hour, when official government experts pronounced their findings, AIDS wisdom had achieved Nirvana, and the experts were widely recognized throughout liberaldom as gurus. The HIV AIDS myth was born, along with a whole lot of new careers based on it.
Thus, along with the HIV AIDS myth, was born the AIDS Establishment, keepers of divine wisdom concerning AIDS, and thus began another example of government “science” being thoroughly politicized, and of government error being simultaneously compounded, defended and strengthened. So far, there are three major causes for AIDS that are pushed by the government, solidly recorded for posterity in print and on video tape, and they are as follows: 1) HIV; 2) ignorance; and, 3) our “Victorian” society.
Right. Queen Victoria did it.
Obviously the author of this last cause (AIDS Czar Kristine Gebbie) not only doesn’t get out much, but also doesn’t watch much TV, go to the movies, or read much about life in Washington D.C. She thinks we’re a very Victorian society. It’s not funny when you consider that this was your government talking.
Let us pursue the evolution of the HIV AIDS myth.
HIV, the human immunodeficiency virus, is not really a virus. It is a retrovirus, a class of organisms that have never been observed to harm human cells, and have never been observed to magically transform into anything else that does attack human cells.
Actually, organism might be the wrong word. A retrovirus is an incomplete "side" of a DNA spiral ladder - picture half a ladder, one upright support and some rungs, but no other-side support - that is capable of chemically reproducing itself, but not completing the whole ladder or any more of the rungs than it began with. Strictly speaking, we may not say that it is alive, or that it is dead; it is a piece of a part of a strand of DNA.
It is, most simply put, a unique peace of self-replicable stuff.
Viruses are larger and more complete replicable strands. Generally, the ones that can hurt us get into our cells and replicate themselves, and destroy the cells they get into. This has never been observed with a retrovirus, and certainly not with HIV.
So then, how did we arrive at the universally held conclusion that HIV “incubates” and then somehow triggers or transforms into AIDS, the dreaded human immunity deficiency disease? By route of educated conjecture; i.e., scientific wild assed guesses. By weak statistics, correlation, and the continuing redefinition of the affliction.
When Margaret Heckler, HHS Secretary, announced in 1984 that HIV was the cause of AIDS, the only evidence was the recent correlation that, apparently, where there was HIV, there was AIDS, sometimes. Hence, the expert pronouncement, there is no AIDS without HIV, according to statements by the AIDS chief of Centers for Disease Control James Curran.
But then, according to the government expert definition of AIDS, there cannot be AIDS in the absence of HIV, because by its very definition, AIDS equates to any one of a continually growing list of diseases, but only when found in combination with HIV. To illustrate this government expert definition:
Get the picture?
This, in a nutshell, is the HIV AIDS myth. By government definition, AIDS is HIV in combination with something else, even though there are so very many cases of AIDS in the absence of HIV, and so very many cases of something else in the absence of HIV.
But what is worse than this tautological, definitive formula for AIDS is the terror formula: HIV=AIDS=Death, which is is and always has been quite false. It should take only one case to disprove the HIV viral cause of AIDS theory. But there are thousands.
Statistical evidence linking HIV and AIDS can only honestly be described as anecdotal. There have been AIDS cases unrelated to HIV and HIV cases unrelated to AIDS from the very beginning, and that trend only continues and strengthens as time goes on. AIDS was first described in 1982; the government definition has been, first, defined, and then more and more inclusively redefined in 1984, 1985, 1987 and 1993. Any true relationship between HIV and AIDS has never been shown, and in all probability does not exist, a simple fact that has not stopped such a relationship from being pushed by the AIDS establishment. At the current rate, by the time you read this, the common cold will probably have made the AIDS indicator list.
Following the above formulae, if you suffer from a common yeast infection and are not HIV positive, you will receive the ordinary treatment for a yeast infection, and go on about your business. But if you also are HIV positive, you may be treated with, as the AIDS establishment experts once insisted, AZT, which will, in and of itself, cause your muscles and body to atrophy and waste away, destroy your ability to produce white blood cells, put you in a wheelchair, and, if you take it long enough, will most certainly kill you.
AZT is, hopefully, the worst of several substances rushed into service by the AIDS establishment, and should be recognized by all citizens as a very dangerous toxic substance. It was designed in 1964 as a potential chemotherapy for cancer; by placing a chain-terminator into DNA chains it stops cell division. Unfortunately, it stops all cell division, not only cancerous cell division, and was never approved as a chemotherapy drug because of its side effects, which include myopathy, or muscular atrophy, and severe bone-marrow toxicity.
And you really do not ever want to stop all cell division, particularly in your bone marrow which is crucial to your immune system, and even more particularly if you have no real symptoms other than being HIV positive, and having any one of what used to be considered well known ailments with well known treatments, before the government expert definition of AIDS was foisted upon us, and before AIDS activism aided by the liberal political correctness movement ram-roded AZT past normal controls and into use in hospitals.
So what’s an HIV positive person to do?
Breath a sigh of relief, avoid the medical establishment, give thanks to God, and go on about your life. You will not get AIDS. If you were not infected via a medical procedure, but were infected by sharing a needle or by illicit sex, you would be wise to repent and mend your ways. If you seek treatment, you may very well be treated unto death. AZT is not a good treatment for anything; it is only a lethal bone marrow toxin. AZT, in almost any dosage, given to any human being in any condition at all, over a long enough period of time, will eventually kill that human being.
People died as a result of the HIV AIDS myth and some of them were quite famous. It appears likely that Arthur Ash, Rudolf Nureyev, and even Kimberly Bergalis, who appeared in such a pitiful state before Congress in support of the HIV AIDS myth, and who had nothing more than a common yeast infection coupled with the perfectly harmless HIV retrovirus, and many others, wasted away and died, not due to AIDS, but due to AZT treatments. The AIDS Establishment doesn't want to talk about this.
Probably, if you were her doctor, you wouldn't want to talk about it either.
Once yeast infections were added to the growing list of indicator diseases, its combination with HIV made Miss Bergalis’ condition become “full blown AIDS” according to the AIDS establishment, and the Centers for Disease Control, and AZT was prescribed. AZT is likely the most toxic substance ever approved for use as a drug in America; its long term affects are quite lethal, even on perfectly healthy and strong individuals.
This should be an easy thing to prove, if the AIDS establishment wanted to prove it, which they do not; all that would need to be done would be to subject some perfectly healthy chimpanzees to AZT in regular doses similar to those currently given to human beings, and see how long it would take for them to waste away and die with all the classic AIDS symptoms.
There was a human placebo-controlled double-blind trial in 1986, which the FDA used as a basis for approving the drug. Despite the fact that the FDA and trial investigators knew full well that the trial had become unblinded by the patients, who figured out which was the placebo and which was the drug, and those who had the drug shared it with those who did not. So even more patients began the process of sickening and wasting away. In this study, which by the way was funded by Burroughs Wellcome, who manufactured AZT for profit, the planned 24 week trial period was shortened to an average of 17 weeks because the recipients were getting so sick. During the trials, many of the recipients had to be kept alive by blood transfusions to counteract the severe bone-marrow toxicity of AZT.
The results? Government approval, of course. The HIV AIDS myth had to be supported. The Concorde trials in Europe came under similar pressure to stop the studies early; these tests were of the results of “early AZT dosage” in HIV positives who had no other symptoms. Results, before the tests were ended early, showed not only that there were no beneficial effects, but that there was greater anemia, lower white blood-cell counts, nausea and general sickness in the early-use group than in the later-use group. Three out of four AZT studies have been stopped early due to side effects. One wonders why they still call all of these typical, constant, repeated effects side effects.
It will interest the reader to note the great difference in the external appearance of AZT, between that AZT which is given to patients and that which is used by researchers. As a drug, as it is given to patients, AZT is in an innocent appearing white capsule with a blue band. As an experimental research substance, laboratory researchers receive this same substance in a bottle bearing a very prominent black skull-and-cross bones label on a bright field of orange. The label warning says: “Toxic. Toxic by inhalation, in contact with skin and if swallowed. Target organ(s): Blood Bone Marrow. If you feel unwell, seek medical advice (show the label where possible). Wear suitable protective clothing.”
This label is on doses of only 25mg, much smaller doses than are prescribed for the average AIDS patient. Obviously the AIDS establishment and the government was and is far more interested in showing sensitivity to the frantic homosexual community than in stubbornly, relentlessly, and even insensitively seeking the truth. Some, I’m afraid, were and are most passionately interested in canonizing homosexual martyrs.
The HIV AIDS myth, the AIDS establishment and new legal special homosexual rights are intrinsically linked together; the AIDS establishment has become a very serious political power to be reckoned with. Common sense has no place here. Each time the hysterical activists scream “HIV=AIDS=DEATH,” the new homosexual mantra, the liberal government becomes more determined to show its sensitivity and order the “disease” to be cured, by government edict. Perhaps the cure will be legislated. The HIV AIDS myth will prevail, no matter what.
Public Condemnation of Critics
Anyone who dares to suggest that theoretical causative activity should stop is immediately publicly attacked as an insensitive homophobe who “blames the victim” and somehow contributes to the problem. The shear stupidity of this position is strangely more infectious than is HIV; it has become the universal view in government, the media and the rest of show biz, and academia.
But here’s an incontrovertible fact for you to consider: other than infection through medical procedures, HIV is passed on by sharing needles, fornication, adultery and sodomy. People who do not share needles with anyone and who restrict their sexual activity within the normal bounds of marriage neither get nor pass on the harmless HIV retrovirus, or any other venereal infection. Period.
But, thanks to the constantly reinforced HIV AIDS myth, the HIV victim and even martyr mentality rages on in high places, places which, incidentally, have the highest HIV infection levels. People who get other diseases such as cancer are still called patients, but those with HIV are now victims, and automatically quasi-heroes, even more particularly if they are or are thought to be heterosexual, if that makes any sense at all.
Magic Johnson for instance, was rallied round, lionized and universally supported as a real hero because he publicly confessed his own marital infidelity and then launched a new career teaching “responsible” fornication and “safe” promiscuity to other people’s children. Interestingly, he’s likely going to out live most of us if he doesn't allow himself to be “treated” with some deadly poison.
Meanwhile, researchers, primarily virologists, have been given a conclusion and ordered to provide proof of it with all due haste, and they’ve been stupidly beating their heads against a stone wall ever since. They keep trying to invent a vaccine against a retrovirus that in all likelihood does not cause the illness they want to immunize against, and they keep wondering how HIV so quickly and miraculously “evolves” new defense mechanisms or new HIV forms which are immune to the vaccines. You will find few, if any, places in this site where I accuse liberal intellectuals in the media and in the government of being particularly brilliant; but in this case, through pressure, they have negatively infected the goals, motives and professional integrity of researchers and “experts” who should know better. All that has come out of HIV vaccine research so far is some great looking computer graphics and computer generated virus cartoons that look really terrific on TV. Very good computer programming by somebody. All supporting the forgone conclusion, which is, of course, the HIV AIDS myth.
Not the first time?
There are parallel stories in recent history. In Japan, beginning in the 50s, a new “disease” called SMON manifested itself primarily in hospitals among patients and medical workers; contagious disease seemed indicated. The symptoms involved intestinal bleeding or diarrhea and nerve degeneration, paralysis and blindness. The government formed a commission, launched an inquiry and funded research into the cause; a viral cause was assumed, and diligently searched for. (Note the quick viral cause assumption, just like in the case of the HIV AIDS myth.)
Years of stubborn research by virologists and even bacteriologists provided no solid evidence; a virus was indeed discovered, as one may be expected to be found when it is intensely searched for in any population, in some patients; but it could not be shown to be causative. Years of search proved fruitless. Further major outbreaks in other provinces lead the government Ministry of Health and Welfare to fund another effort and form a new commission with ten times the funding of the first one; a viral cause was still the assumption.
More years of fruitless searching. Then in 1969 and 1970 the observation of green tongues and green urine in some patients led to analysis of the green pigment, and the discovery that it was an altered form of clioquinol, an anti-diarrheal drug the patients were being treated with. It was the very drug being prescribed to treat patients for SMON. Instead of simply killing intestinal amoeba and passing from the system, it was being absorbed into the body and causing the SMON symptoms.
It turned out that 96% of all SMON victims had taken clioquinol before developing any symptoms, and that government approval of the drug coincided with the first onset of the “epidemic” in 1953. Faced with a rising death toll, the Japanese government went public and banned the drug in September of 1970, and the epidemic was over within three years.
Despite these facts, so strong is the pro-viral cause bias in the field that there are some virologists who refuse to accept a non-viral cause for SMON to this day, long after the end of the SMON crisis in Japan.
The American HIV AIDS myth mandated AIDS viral-cause scenario is worse, both in terms of numbers and duration. It has reached a point where virologists and doctors and researchers cannot or will not admit to the possibility of prescribed drugs such as AZT actually causing the very symptoms and inevitable deaths for which the AIDS patients are being treated. To do so would mean accepting responsibility and liability for negligent homicide on a grand scale; denial, smoke screens, and continued pursuit of other causes is preferable.
There is another major contributor to this massive error, and this contributing reason exists to the everlasting shame of academia: despite many years of hard, concentrated effort, and despite the complete absence of any hard evidence of any viral link to AIDS, in the entire field of virology there exists not enough honest objectivity, or perhaps courage, for the possibility of any other cause to even be considered. It is unthinkable. It is the pre-ordained HIV AIDS myth or nothing.
This kind of thinking, this lack of objectivity, this inability to recognize the meaning of evidence or the lack of it, probably contributes mightily to on-going problems in research on the causes of many other maladies such as Legionnaire’s Disease. Lack of evidence is evidence, but today’s scientists don’t seem to know that.
Complete absence of any effective opposition to the government sponsored HIV AIDS myth and the HIV=AIDS pronouncement has had devastating consequences on society. As a current example, the law, and even America’s Most Wanted TV show, is relentlessly pursuing an HIV-positive “perpetrator” who goes around the country committing unprotected fornication with other unprotected fornicators, and his full knowledge of his “condition” places him in jeopardy of being charged with premeditated homicide. And in fact, his actions may result in deaths of some of his “victims” if they are treated with AZT or other poisons, as they very well may be, although with the best of intentions.
But the negative consequences of the massive misinformation stemming from the HIV AIDS myth extend far beyond deforming justice; it affects our collective sense of scandal. Note the cavalier manner in which the commentators and the law and the witnesses and “victims” publicly speak of their involvement in the causative activity. Fornication and adultery and sodomy are not scandalous any more, unless they are “unprotected,” even despite the irrefutable fact that “protected” sex may easily pass on the harmless HIV retrovirus. We rapidly approach the cultural point where there is no scandal.
Well then, what is HIV, and what is AIDS?
If we would seek the truth, we must look to information sources other than political ones; homosexual activists, politicians and their bureaucratic appointees, show biz personalities, and politically correct journalists should not be listened to until after the virologists and epidemiologists have spoken.
Dr. Peter Duesberg, professor of molecular biology and one of the world’s leading authorities on retroviruses, has been saying for many years that HIV:
HIV is merely a harmless “hitchhiker” retrovirus, of interest only as a marker for risk behavior. And what you “risk” getting by way of the much publicized high risk behavior, is the harmless HIV retrovirus, the various other known venereal and blood disorders associated with such behavior, and nothing more. Certainly not AIDS. You get HIV the ways the activists say you do, but you don't get AIDS that way. And you only get infected by the HIV AIDS myth if you allow yourself to believe it.
The harmless HIV retrovirus is picked up via homosexual activity, needle sharing, or other exposure to the blood or body fluids of other HIV positive people.
There is an unrelated AIDS disease or malady, in which the patient’s T-cells somehow dwindle away, and in which the patient is likely to be attacked by opportunistic diseases such as pneumocystis; but any relationship to HIV appears to be, statistically, very weakly coincidental and unrelated.
If we look at only classic cases of AIDS and ignore the ever growing screwy government definition of AIDS, of course, we are looking at a very dramatic reduction in numbers of cases, the true cause of which is still unproven. Dr. Duesberg’s theory is that true, real AIDS is caused by drugs. Not needle sharing, not contamination via any germs or viruses, not HIV or the ways you get HIV infection, but the actual drugs themselves (we’re talking about pure AIDS here, not HIV.)
Which drugs or what combinations of drugs, or how the drugs are taken is a matter of conjecture. Since homosexuals from the so-called “bathhouse culture” or various other homosexual counter-cultures frequently are or were very heavy illicit drug users, and since many AIDS victims may not admit to participation in an illegal activity such as drug abuse, it is possible (I think, probable) that homosexual activity, in and of itself, has nothing whatsoever to do with AIDS, even though the victims of classical AIDS appear to be predominantly homosexual. They may also be predominantly drug abusers. Most homosexuals are drub abusers; that's just the way it is. They get HIV from the risk activities they are involved in, but they get AIDS itself from drugs and drugs alone. And they get the strictly mental HIV AIDS myth infection primarily from the AIDS establishment.
A key fact to keep in mind while considering this drug theory of AIDS is that drugs, whether legal or illegal, are foreign to our bodies and our chemical composition, and always interfere with our normal body processes. That’s what differentiates drugs from foods. Food, whether in the form of macro or micro nutrients, is required for proper function of life processes; drugs interfere with those same life processes. This interference may be therapeutic and desirable, and may indeed be prescribed with good reason by a medical doctor, but it is still interference, and is quite likely to have undesirable side effects.
Lots of people die each year from the effects of prescribed drugs, over the counter drugs, and illegal drugs, because drugs always interfere with normal bodily function in some way. Knowing that the nervous systems of people have been permanently altered by drugs, we should not be completely surprised at the possibility of permanently altering a person’s immune system via drugs.
If Dr. Duesberg is right, then the emaciated patient in the AIDS ward corresponds precisely to the emaciated junkie in the opium den, and represents a phenomenon that has been observed, although in a different light, for untold centuries. We're talking about real AIDS here, not cases diagnosed in accordance with the government sponsored HIV AIDS myth.
Perhaps if the problem were studied by bio-chemists or pharmacists or medical doctors seeking to find or develop a drug with which to cause the permanent breakdown of the human immune system, the various drugs found could then be compared to the illegal drugs people buy from criminals, and then snort, shoot, smoke, pop, or otherwise ingest, in various combinations, and we might then be a little closer to the ultimate truth of the matter. The culprit drug or combination of drugs will likely turn out to be something similar to AZT, with the exception that the damage to the immune system may be permanent, but perhaps not; if the person is addicted to it, they may continue taking it until it kills them.
There may be some point of no return that I don’t know about in long term AZT poisoning, but in general, if the victim stops taking AZT, he will begin to get better, and eventually return to full health. If he was HIV positive before the AZT poisoning began, he will remain HIV positive after it is stopped, but so what? The harmless HIV retrovirus has nothing to do with the immune system. If all you have is HIV, it is only superstitious belief in the HIV AIDS myth that can kill you.
As time went on, I suspect that the medical / pharmaceutical community became increasingly aware, in a very private way, of the devastation being caused by AZT and AZT-like drugs. We went through a period of increasingly "effective" drug combinations called "HIV cocktails" or "AIDS cocktails" that were having ever increasing "effectiveness" on AIDS patients. What was happening (I suspect) was that the "cocktails" were containing less and less of the deadly poisons, they were causing fewer patients to sicken and die, and - voila - they were "curing" AIDS patients, or at least causing them less symptoms. Interestingly, at an ever increasing cost. Some "cocktails" cost huge amounts of money. Probably, today, none of them contain any AZT, and the medical / pharmaceutical community would very much prefer to not even discuss the topic.
The Perpetual Motion of the Definition
The AIDS establishment has been forced to modify its definition of AIDS, first from the fervently stated and absolutely adamant “HIV always causes AIDS,” to “HIV causes a majority of AIDS cases,” and finally to “AIDS is generally thought to be caused by HIV.” They will not abandon HIV. The HIV AIDS myth lives on.
In the media, in many cases, HIV and AIDS are used interchangeably. They have bought into the HIV AIDS myth so completely that they speak of numbers of AIDS cases when they mean numbers of HIV infections; they say HIV when they mean AIDS; it’s often difficult to tell which they are talking about. Most frequently, lately, I've heard newscasters say "HIV - AIDS" using both terms, whether talking about fund raising, awareness programs, or whatever. You will still hear media commentators discussing how some little child just received a veritable death sentence by being diagnosed as HIV - AIDS positive at birth.
It only takes one case to disprove a viral theory of AIDS; but there are many, and there have been many from the start. About half of the AIDS cases in existence have never even been tested for HIV. Among those who were tested, many cases appear in medical literature from the mid 1980s to the present in which AIDS patients were not HIV positive; since 1992 the AIDS establishment has been playing up the “discovery” of these old and well known cases and some of the new ones as pointing to another insidious, as yet unidentified killer virus like HIV, although no such virus has been found. Not a single HIV positive chimp, of over a hundred infected with HIV, came down with AIDS since 1985, causing the length of the established “latency” period to be lengthened to ten years. The HIV AIDS myth is so well entrenched that clear empirical evidence against it is openly disregarded.
I was interested in watching what might happen to the length of the latency period after 1996, expecting another increase in the latency period. But that’s not what happened. Once again modern scientists proved that they cannot properly interpret the results of their own controlled tests unless the results verify the preconceived, dogmatic theory being “proven” by the test. No infected chimps got AIDS, therefore, the test itself was a failure.
All these results of all this testing, of course, did not mean that HIV does not turn into AIDS; that’s still a known fact, a forgone conclusion, the "given" conclusion the testers were ordered to prove; what it means is that the test, and the testers, failed somehow. The HIV AIDS myth has got to be right. The tests themselves failed. They would rather not talk about it; failure hurts self esteem too much. That's the way science is done these days.
So then they tried to close it down quietly and get rid of all of the perfectly healthy HIV infected chimps; but how? The scientists wore what appeared to be space suits around the chimps, to avoid getting the deadly HIV infection, although their own science said there were only very limited ways one may be infected; apparently the scientists didn't have quite that much faith in their own dogma, because they wore the suits, as they tried to dream up “safe” ways of disposing of the chimps in a ecologically, biologically safe way, without somehow devastating everybody down wind or down stream. They took care of the situation quietly, and the HIV AIDS myth lived on.
Three quarters of the 20,000 American hemophiliacs are HIV positive, and are also living longer, and virtually all have been infected for eight years or more. There are over 15,000 cases of needle-stick hepatitis infection each year among health care workers, but no true AIDS infections among this same, obvious high risk group. The Center For Disease Control claims that there are four such cases, but can’t identify or describe them, and there are a few cases being disputed in the courts by “victims” who want their money.
Statistically speaking, surely there should be a few thousand, or a hundred, or ten. Or perhaps even one, with certainty. HIV positive percentage of tested army recruits has remained constant since 1985, which seems to refute the notion of a rampant epidemic, and cases in this group remain confined to homosexuals and drug abusers, repudiating the notion of an epidemic spreading throughout the rest of the population.
Dr. Duesberg wrote in 1990 regarding the HIV AIDS myth that there had not ever been even one single controlled epidemiological study to confirm the postulated viral etiology of AIDS. There still hasn't been one. Very interesting, in light of all the vocal expertise on the subject.
San Francisco’s Project Inform referred to “studies” in a discussion paper, which all turned out to be bogus. At the Amsterdam AIDS conference, a paper was presented titled “HIV Causes AIDS: A Controlled Study” and was touted by the San Francisco Examiner to be the long-awaited rebuttal to Professor Duesberg. It was a study of Vancouver homosexuals, some of whom were HIV positive, and some of whom were not, and found that, in every case, AIDS occurred in those who were HIV positive. However, the groups were not controlled for extent or duration of drug use; it turns out that all the AIDS victims had been doing drugs for years, while negatives either not at all or for a much shorter period.
Commentator Tony Brown (Tony Brown’s Journal) is the only public voice I’ve heard opposing the HIV-AIDS connection; he uses the term DAIDS, for Drug Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, and I think he’s right on track. But his voice is not heard widely enough and his message is largely lost on the public. Because he is not a doctor or a researcher and is not receiving any grants from the government he is not under attack by the government, as is (or was) Dr. Duesberg. Yet. Tony Brown is currently only ignored by the wider media, perhaps to be martyred in some way after Dr. Duesberg’s fires of punishment have cooled.
The results of the good professor’s efforts? Why, the National Institutes of Health, the government agency that has been funding AIDS research, cut off his earned, awarded, seven-year “outstanding investigator” grant, of course. The HIV AIDS myth had to be defended. Dr. Duesberg is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and was the first to map the genetic structure of retroviruses, but he is no longer popular with the NIH, or with the rest of the government or media, or with the rest of the AIDS establishment. All in the name of science, you understand. Political science.
But Dr. Duesberg wasn’t the only one to feel the retaliatory sting of the guardians of “conventional wisdom” and “generally accepted knowledge” on AIDS; when Dr. Albert Sabin, inventor of the oral polio vaccine publicly and strongly agreed with Dr. Duesberg’s AIDS hypothesis, retaliation came in the form of having his position at NIH put in jeopardy, and he was quite effectively silenced by his superiors. Such is the powerful support for the HIV AIDS myth.
Thus, through the intimidation of scientists, is science politicized. In general, when an ailment of any kind gets the attention of the research community, the various “fields,” sometimes myopically, look for causes in narrowly defined areas. Nutritionists look for nutritional deficiencies; toxicologists look for poisons; bacteriologists look for new bacteria; virologists look for new virus’; and so on. At the same time, they each tend to tout their respective “fields” as the most important and most promising, and of most potential benefit to man.
Once, not so many years ago, pellagra and beriberi and scurvy were thought to be infectious rather than vitamin deficiencies, which proves that the biological research community is just as human and imperfect as is any other community. And, just as in other communities, there are always individuals who seek to become a great “star,” and some who do so fervently and with great competitive spirit. But it appears that the virologists have nearly gone nuts on this one, with a big, big boost from super-liberal, super-sensitive government. It was virology that spawned the HIV AIDS myth; that's how virology and the CDC does science these days.
The Beginning of the Myth
It began, and continues, with seemingly blithe disregard for empirical evidence coupled with complete disregard for professional ethics. A French researcher named Luc Montagnier, hoping to gain American research establishment support, sent HIV retrovirus samples to an American retro-virologist, Robert Gallo. Shortly thereafter, Robert Gallo “discovered” a new retrovirus that later proved to be identical to the HIV retrovirus which had been sent to him by Luc Montagnier. Looks like fraud to me. Rather than publish his “discovery” for peer review, Gallo grandly announced it in a government press conference with Margaret Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Instant world fame for Robert Gallo. This official public government announcement quite effectively killed all debate before it ever got a chance to begin. As of that date, 4/23/84, the cause of AIDS was, by official American government edict, officially known, and any researcher would question that “knowledge,” the HIV AIDS myth, only at the risk of his grant money or project or position. The “field” of virology never even asked, let alone answered, the simple question of whether or not HIV actually causes AIDS. That question had been answered politically, not scientifically.
It would appear that anyone may come up with any wild hypothesis at all and, if some bureaucrat likes the sound of it and can speak with the authority of the government, it will automatically be elevated to the status of a genuine scientific theory, even in the absence of any empirical evidence or repeatable proofs.
Therefore, I hereby offer my own hypothesis regarding treatment of human beings with AZT, and AIDS in general:
I am no scientist, have no laboratory or the knowledge or ability to even begin to prove my hypothesis; but what difference does that make? Margaret Heckler and Robert Gallo have no empirical evidence of their hypothesis either. Neither does anyone else. Maybe some politician or bureaucrat will like my hypothesis, too, and pronounce it to be true, and elevate it to the status of a scientific theory. That’s how science appears to be done these days.
The number of AIDS cases, even as defined by the government’s ever expanding definition, has been steadily declining, and the media has been doing its best to play that fact down, or not report it at all. Between 1990 and 1991, the number of new AIDS cases among homosexuals was zero, and among hemophiliacs was also zero; pediatric HIV cases declined from 693 to 596, and teen AIDS declined from 170 to 160 nationwide.
Of the total 206,000 AIDS cases in America, roughly 10 per cent are women, and the great majority of these cases are drug related. Between 1990 and 1991 female AIDS incidence increased at half the rate of the previous year, an increase, but a 50 per cent decline in the rate of increase. The trend line is down after having peaked, like all epidemics, if indeed this is an epidemic, with the decline in the female rate lagging the decline in the male rate; nevertheless, the surgeon general felt compelled to announce that she was “alarmed” at the increasing incidence of AIDS among women, a clear falsehood. If you had listened to C. Everett Coop, Antonia Novello, or the AIDS establishment, every one of us is at risk, including grandma and grandpa, and by the end of the century most of us would be dead from AIDS. Well, don't look now, but the end of the century came and went. The HIV AIDS myth lives on, but, so do we.
These people are determined to convince the populace of the existence of a heterosexual epidemic that simply does not exist. The media has obviously suppressed good news and emphasized bad news. Careers now depend upon the expansion of the epidemic, and upon the escalation of government War On AIDS; indeed, activists would like a cabinet level secretary of AIDS complete with a full staff, and perhaps a new department of AIDS, with high sounding bureaucratic titles like Principle Assistant Vice Deputy Undersecretary. A very powerful incentive to quickly add disease names to the approved government list in order to show that the epidemic is gaining ground. The media, as usual, is doing its part. The HIV AIDS myth brings in billions of dollars in heroic contributions from people who believe it.
The government has been misleading the public on the AIDS epidemic at least since 1986, when the CDC moved all AIDS victims of African or Haitian origin into the heterosexual category of AIDS cases, regardless of whether they were homosexual or drug users. The result was a doubling of heterosexual AIDS cases from 2 per cent to 4 per cent, and, right on queue, the media pounced on it and hasn’t let go of it since. It is now “our” disease as opposed to “their” disease. The dreaded “second stage” of the epidemic was announced with great fanfare by every gorgeous talking head on American TV, and the public was told that the AIDS risk was widening, and that heterosexual AIDS was on the rise.
A 1988 study was similarly pounced on to show that AIDS was on the rise on the campus, and among women, even though 1) the percentage of infection on campus was half the rate of the population at large, and despite the fact that 2) from among all 30 of the campus cases found, 28 were men, even though the majority of those tested were women. Proving that journalists either don’t know how to get the facts straight, or they bend the facts to suite their purposes.
Then in 1990, they did it again; viewers and readers were informed that a new report from the CDC indicated that AIDS was on the rise on college campuses, and that AIDS incidents were increased from the 1988 study. In fact, it was the 1988 study, reprinted in some medical journal in 1990, there to be found and used by the media to again help build AIDS alarm in the population. In the American media, as Michael Fumento put it, “Only with AIDS can an old study be declared an alarming increase over itself.”
The media have used all sorts of experts to “prove” the existence of heterosexual AIDS, and to promote the false story of a dramatic increase in female AIDS that will eventually doom us all; they quote psychologists, of all things, and even occasionally virologists, but not epidemiologists, the real experts on the subject of epidemics who are unlikely to say the scary things the media would prefer to quote, exaggerate and distort. But the wildest and most distorted claims have come not from the media, but from the government, and they are never questioned, of course, by the media.
In February 1993, HHS Secretary Donna Shalala told Congress “We could spend all our energy on research and immunization and education and still not have any Americans left unless we’re prepared to confront the crisis of AIDS.”
Right. That was our top health official talking.
Michael Fumento questioned the premise that everyone is at risk of acquiring AIDS in direct defiance of the liberal commandment, thou shalt not question the liberal elitist conventional wisdom; the result? Censorship. Direct, unmistakable censorship. Letters were circulated to book distributors asking that his book, The Myth Of Heterosexual AIDS, be kept off of the shelves.
It was effective, and the boycott was helped by the same people who opposed “special interest groups” like Christians who wanted to keep girlie magazines out of the reach of children, and who opposed Muslim censors and proudly and loudly sold Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses, and who, in celebration of Banned Book Week, organized a seminar against censorship.The AIDS establishment also pressured televisions shows to cancel appearances by Mr. Fumento. Censorship of thee, but not of me. Liberal and politically correct censorship is censorship, just the same. The really interesting thing about all of this controversy over whether AIDS is a homosexual thing, a heterosexual thing, or even a venereal disease, is that it may prove to have nothing to do with sex at all. In which case it would prove a sick preoccupation and even obsession with sex and topics sexual on the part of the AIDS establishment, the government, bureaucrats, the SLIMC1 , and all the rest of show biz.
Until solid proof has been presented from any quarter whatsoever that HIV bears any true relationship to AIDS, or that any virus at all bears any true relationship to AIDS, we all should consider AIDS to be unrelated to HIV or a virus, and stop listening to AIDS activists, government experts, the media, the liberal censors, and other elite, pompous clowns who don’t know whereof they speak but feel compelled to speak anyway.
With the best of intentions, of course
Then there was the Magic Johnson-Linda Ellerby AIDS video, A Conversation With Magic, contributing mightily to the HIV AIDS myth. Even though the two little children on the show who were HIV positive didn’t become HIV positive via sexual activity, Magic and Linda felt compelled to teach the rest of the little children, and yours at home, how to protect themselves sexually; they therefore demonstrated the use of a condom and graphically explained its use in sexual intercourse, while emphasizing that anyone can get HIV. Even though it may be true that anyone can get the harmless HIV retrovirus, little children from six to eleven are not normally sexually active, and have no need to be exposed to this kind of material.
Little children not born to HIV positive mothers and who have never had a blood transfusion are not at any risk at all for HIV infection. Period.
There was also the implication that, in seeking advice, children could keep looking for new sources of advice until they found one they liked. Linda: “Remember, you have a right to know the answers. You can ask your parents. You can ask the school nurse. You can call information and ask for the state department of health.” Great advice for a little kid; ask a petty bureaucrat, or the first political hireling who answers the phone.
The demonstration and discussion of the condom in all likelihood planted in some young minds the ideas that 1) a condom is some kind of a magic shield; and 2) that society expects them to start having sex pretty soon, or, as Linda so sweetly put it, “when you grow up some.” Which leaves “some” pretty much up to the child to decide.
A good many adolescent boys would begin sexual activity the very moment their hormones begin to kick in, verifying the continuance of that ancient phenomenon, and further validating the age-old obsession of fathers with ensuring the safety of their daughters. As much as I hate to burst the bubble of all of the idealistic liberals out there seeking to do their part for “AIDS awareness” causes, they, like the government and the media, are flat wrong. The HIV AIDS myth is a myth.
Here is the root of the question: the liberals, who control much of the government, all of the media and academia, are convinced, not only that HIV causes AIDS, but that the HIV problem is one of too many infections, rather than one of too much illicit sex. The abortion question has precisely the same root; the liberals see that problem as one of too many births out of wedlock, rather than one of too much premarital sex. This view is extremely revealing of liberal moral standards, and we can see the tragic consequences of the basic, immoral policies they continue to push all around us.
They lecture school children who are far too young to be sexually active on the principles of “responsible” sex, which means, to them, the mechanics of how birth control works, how to prevent HIV infection while having illicit sex, where to get abortion advice, etc. All of which always turns out to be bad advice, serving only to aggravate the problem by promoting the causative activity, even among populations that have never previously participated in the activity, like kindergartners and first graders.
Having sex causes babies. Not ignorance, and not Victorianism, but sex, and only sex, protected or otherwise. Only the liberal elite haven’t learned that very simple fact yet.
On the issue of AIDS, we have an example of a gross government mistake that 1) causes a gross misuse of national treasure and resources, 2) diverts individual and national attention away from more important matters, 3) further centralizes power in the name of the national good, and 4) kills innocent citizens; lots of them. All with the best of intentions, of course.
The mistake is not so much the statement that HIV is directly linked to AIDS, or that AZT should be taken as soon as possible by anyone diagnosed as HIV positive, as it is the absolutely arrogant government ram-rodding of policy in the complete absence of anything remotely resembling irrefutable empirical evidence supporting the hypotheses.
And our media, who pride themselves on their “investigative reporting,” wouldn’t recognize an honest investigation that relentlessly pursued the truth if one came up and bit them on the butt, and savagely hung on. They are supporting a myth. If they are cognizant of that fact, then they are perpetrating a hoax. Which is, the HIV AIDS myth. The elite of the media know far more about political correctness, hair styles, power ties, self promotion and mutual adulation then they do about the pursuit of truth. Our biased media is just as responsible as our government; personally, I blame them far more.
The government/media HIV AIDS myth has been and is being used by the homosexual activists and the liberal political correctness movement to improve the public image of homosexuals, cloak homosexuals in respectability and even nobility, and to promote homosexuality as simply some kind of a normal, perhaps even preferable, alternative lifestyle. It represents a classic example of yet another fine liberal intellectual flying leap, off another cliff, straight at another bunch of wrong liberal conclusions.
An alternative plan for the War On AIDS which might be equally expensive and equally effective, and yet infinitely less harmful, would be to: 1) dig a great hole in the ground; 2) label it “War On AIDS”; and 3) begin bulldozing and shoveling our tax dollars into it.
May God protect us from the experts.
Let us pray.
Father, God, Lord of Heaven and Earth, let your Spirit touch the hearts of all American scientists, opening their eyes and their closed minds, that our scientists might again become objective, and searchers of truth, finders and defenders of truth, who will rise above politics and social pressure and even state pressure, always in defense of pure, objective truth.
Unleash their talents, Lord, that they might stop error, immediately, every time they see it, and return to the scientific method. Let them enjoy the integrity of those who came before them, and pass that integrity on to future generations of scientists and medical professionals. Grant those who have knowingly sinned opportunity to repent of it and make amends, and to save many, and opportunity to pray.
Lord, look with special mercy on all of the poor victims of AIDS, and on all of the poor victims of AZT and any other poisonous treatments who are mistaken for AIDS victims, hear their prayers of contrition, and our prayers for them, that they might at last come into Your glorious presence.
Lord, that they might have hope; Lord, that fewer might die in so horrible a way; Lord, that the scourge of this error might end soon. And we pray that Your Spirit might also touch the hearts of all in the AIDS Establishment and the homosexual-activists, that they might turn from illicit sex and from showing any part of it in a good light to other people, that they, too, might properly repent of their sins and eventually come into your kingdom.
In Jesus’ name we pray.
Return to What's New page
Return to HOME PAGE
Hover-Link Footnotes: For the convenience of those readers using devices that lack a mouse, these footnotes are provided for all webpages, in case any webpage contains any hover-links. (If you don't have a mouse, you can't "hover" over a link.)
Respond to This Article Below The Last Entry
Date: Fri Jun 04 07:20:32 2010
Thank you for that article. I had no idea it was like this. I really believed that HIV was a precursor to AIDS, or that it turned into AIDS, or that they were linked in some way. You have really opened my eyes. What can be done about it? That really is the question. I bet if this were raised in polite conversation, the holder of this view would be slammed.
Date: Fri Jun 04 12:16:59 2010
From: Vic Biorseth
The only thing I know to do about it is to say it out loud in public, which is what I do here.
You would not believe the sleezy profanity and insulting vitriol that comes in opposing the clear truth on this webpage. I don’t publish that stuff; I just immediately delete it. The same kind of comments come in opposing what I say on a whole lot of pages on this website, and none of them ever see the light of day here. Only when someone has at least the beginnings of a somewhat coherent argument does it even get published on this site.
If you’re going to talk about this to anyone, be prepared for that sort of thing ahead of time and you won’t be so shocked. Opponents have no valid arguments and no empirical evidences, but they cannot or will not accept the truth, and so they go into what I call elitist, know-it-all denial mode and just start screaming.
I will never understand how anyone in his right mind, even a homosexual, could so easily be snookered into spending thousands of dollars on “treatments” that at best will have no affect on his “ailment” and at worst might make him horribly sick and even kill him.
It’s like the old Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times.
Date: Thu May 12 06:26:18 2011
From: Dr. Najuma Qureshi Heptullah
Mr. Vic Biorseth,
I came across your website while researching on AIDS. I have no idea how that happened, since yours is obviously a religious/political site. I just wanted to set the record straight in your article regarding AIDS. I am afraid you are quite mal-informed regarding the disease process of AIDS and its relation to HIV. I have heard of AIDS denialism before, but this is the first that I am coming across such an article. I must say that I am impressed. To the average Joe, this looks like an impressive new thesis, but an expert can easily see through the gaping holes in your reasoning.
HIV infects vital cells in the human immune system such as helper T cells (specifically CD4+ T cells), macrophages, and dendritic cells. HIV infection leads to low levels of CD4+ T cells, by direct viral killing of infected cells, by increased rates of apoptosis in infected cells; and killing of infected CD4+ T cells by CD8 cytotoxic lymphocytes that recognize infected cells. There goes your argument of HIV being a benign retrovirus down the drain.
When CD4+ T cell numbers decline below a critical level, cell-mediated immunity is lost, and the body becomes progressively more susceptible to opportunistic infections. Most untreated people infected with HIV-1 eventually develop AIDS (correlation factor of greater than 0.94). These individuals mostly die from opportunistic infections or malignancies associated with failure of the immune system.
This is the actual disease progression and prognosis. I am amused to think that for all these researchers, scientists, and immunologists in the world, it took a part-time truck driver to figure the AIDS myth out. Aren't we smart??
Date: Thu May 12 06:47:59 2011
From: Vic Biorseth
Dr. Najuma Qureshi Heptullah:
The AIDS Myth isn’t my theory, we some-time truck drivers – some-time delivery drivers seldom come up with such notions on our own. It is the theory of such luminaries as doctors Duesberg, Sabin and others. I’d like to tell you that I just came up with it sitting around a table with a bunch of truckers at a truck stop, but if I did that, of course, I would just be blowing smoke, as you are doing here. And, of course, I try to avoid joining in head-bobbing, go-along-to-get-along elitist consensus and group-think.
Replicable viral strands that are harmful to human cells get into those cells and destroy them, and they leave behind as evidence of infection a Petri dish littered with the destroyed cells. This has never been observed with any retrovirus, and it certainly has never been observed with HIV. From the very beginning of the “discovery” of the HIV – AIDS so-called connection, an overwhelming majority of AIDS victims were not HIV positive, and an overwhelming majority of HIV positives never, ever developed AIDS. There goes your theory of HIV not being a benign retrovirus down the drain.
Your statement that most people infected with HIV eventually develop AIDS is patently false; you just made that up or, you are in head-nodding, bobble-headed agreement with someone else that made it up.
I am always amused to encounter another Doctor imitating a bobble-headed idiot doll like the ones you used to see in the back windows of cars, with all heads bobbling together in unison. It is quite clear that you would certainly prefer to debate me on this topic than, say, the likes of Dr. Duesberg or Sabin, as your comment here proves.
Date: Thu May 12 09:26:21 2011
From: Dr. Najuma
Mr. Vic Biorseth,
I had never before heard of Dr. Peter Duesberg before you mentioned him. I did some research on him, he is no luminary, more like an embarrassment.
Apart from this topic in which we disagree, you have done some outstanding study regarding Islam. I cannot understand why the rest of the world does not see this, but Islam is no religion of peace. Every murderous terrorist attack in the last decade has been done in the name of Islam, receiving the support of mainstream Muslims and mullahs. I have heard stuff in madrasas that would make your skin crawl with revulsion. I renounced Islam during my studies in UK. I now live as a proud atheist. It is a personal hypothesis of mine, but I think countries like Pakistan (my motherland) remain backwards due to the all pervading influence of this mad religion, that denies people their most basic rights and freedoms. I hope more people in the West would wake up to what this religion actually is. I promise you that it is worse than Nazism or Communism or anything else the world has ever known.
I hope you will be able to spread your message far and wide.
P.S. - I am sorry for calling you a part-time truck driver with idiot theories, but people who oppose mainstream medical information with quack theories just drives me nuts.
Date: Thu May 12 10:50:51 2011
From: Vic Biorseth
Dr. Najuma:You are quite right; Dr Duesberg is an embarrassment to all of TTRSTF4 who have abandoned the scientific method in favor of scientific consensus. It should be of more than passing interest that nothing that he has published has been refuted by anything empirical, just as the HIV=AIDS=DEATH myth has no empirical evidence supporting it. All that supports it is nothing more than mindless, head bobbing, “scientific” consensus.
We are in agreement on the nature of Islam, but it is hard to tell which is worse, between variants of Marxism and variants of Islam. Both present a false front, both seek ultimate world rule, and, fortunately, both are quite impossible pipe dreams, and both will never realize the false goal their useful idiot followers desperately believe in and hope to achieve. That is not to say that many will not suffer and many will not die while Marxist and Islamic champions seek further conquest and power.
Apology accepted; actually, I am a full-time local delivery driver who is currently temporally laid off due to bad business, which is due to the current radical fuel price rise. But we’ll get by, no matter what Obamunism does. I am sorry that you are a “proud atheist,” and I wonder how you fell into such a silly superstition, or religion, or religious belief system, or whatever you describe it as.
Regarding “quack theories” you will find them all over my website. They all oppose the mainstream consensus, in science, in medicine, in psychology-psychiatry, in politics, in weather and climate, etc., and in all cases, it seems that the consensus-thinking is on the side of the theory that cannot be empirically backed up, and the quack-theory is the one that empiricism or other heavy evidences (history, experience, etc.) stands firmly behind. Existing hard evidence makes it much more enjoyable to support a quack theory than an elitist one.
You are not likely to believe this, but I will say it anyway. Satan rules this world, and he is never more pleased and never makes more progress than when men do not even believe that he exists. He is the true father of error and falsehood. He makes men believe in themselves, and little or nothing else. He leads the world into error.
If you would seek the Truth, then you would find the Way, and you would live the Life. Then you might please God, and you would live forever.
Date: Sat Jul 14 22:16:17 2012
There is nothing this spell caster can’t do is a great powerful man, who have heal allot of disease. I’m a living testimony I contacted HIV/AIDS 4 years ago I took all medication no hope, I head about this great spell caster called Dr. Shant Tami of email@example.com who heal people of there sickness I quickly contacted him about my HIV/AIDS he told me not to worry that is going to cast a healing spell and used the INDI-DRUGS to cure my sickness. he send the INDI-DRUGS to me and cast the healing spell he did as he promise I felt something moving in my body I call him and he told me that I’m already cure of HIV/AIDS that I should visit any hospital for check up and all the doctors I visited all told me that I’m HIV/AIDS NEGATIVE. Thanks to this great man who have saved my life by healing me from the sickness he can heal you to of any disease contact him via: INDIANSPELL@YAHOO.COM
Date: Mon Jul 16 05:38:20 2012
From: Vic Biorseth
Personally, I don’t think I would trust this guy as a practitioner of medicine, but that’s just personal. In all likelihood he is more scientific and less harmful than the American CDC or the American AMA in his approach to HIV, the world’s first ever identified and declared “disease” that has no symptoms. HIV “victims” might be considerably safer being treated by him than by any doctor who ever prescribed the deadly bone marrow poison AZT to treat anything at all.
Saturday, February 23,
Converted Page to SBI! Release 3.0 BB 2.0.
Date: Sun Sep 21 2014
From: Vic Biorseth
Changes pursuant to changing the website URL
and name from
Thinking Catholic Strategic Center to
Catholic American Thinker.
Pulled the trigger on the 301 MOVE IT option June 1, 2014. Working my way through all the webpages. .
Please note the language and tone of this monitored Website. This is not the place to stack up vulgar
one-liners and crude rejoinders. While you may support, oppose or
introduce any position or argument, submissions must meet our
standards of logical rigor and civil discourse. We will not
participate in merely trading insults, nor will we tolerate participants merely
trading insults. Participants should not be
thin-skinned or over sensitive to criticism, but should be prepared to
defend their arguments when challenged. If you don’t really have a
coherent argument or counter-argument of your own, sit down and don’t
embarrass yourself. Nonsensical, immoral or merely insulting submissions will
not be published here. If you have something serious to contribute to
the conversation, back it up, keep it clean and keep it civil. We humbly
apologize to all religious conservative thinkers for the need to even say
these things, but the New Liberals are what they are, and the internet is what it is.
If you fear intolerant Leftist repercussions, do not use your real name and do not include email or any identifying information. Leftists can never tolerate opposition or your freedom of speech.
Never be lukewarm.
Life itself demands passion.
He who is indifferent to God has already forfeited his soul.
He who is indifferent to politics has already forfeited his liberty.
In America, religion is not mere window dressing and citizenship is not a spectator sport.
Do not allow our common destiny as a whole people to just happen without your input.
Catholic American Thinker Free E-zine Subscription
The Purpose of this grouping of links is to highlight pseudo-science topics with nothing behind them other than broad consensus, described by F. A. Hayek as Scientism.
The Scientism Pages.
Describing the abandonment of the scientific method in favor of "Democracy in Science", meaning, science done by gathering of popular consensus among "scientists". Old-Boy's-Club science, with awards, congratulations, drinks and cigars all around. (My list of scientists is longer than your list of scientists, therefore my opinion is scientific, and yours is not.)
The Scientism Pages highlight Democratic Group Think in Material Science. The Scientism Pages identify Popular Ideas touted as Scientific by silly, sophmoric "Scientists".
Refuting Scientism, the term coined by F. A. Hayek for modern pseudo-science. Refuting Scientism is another ho-hum, heavy-sigh, here-we-go-again effort to return to truth, common sense and sanity.
The Modernist Heresy: Western Man's Descent from Philosophy into Modernism. Modernism is the heresy of heresies, because it carries within it all previous heresies, being as it is a direct, frontal assault upon faith and all doctrine and dogma.
The Population Problem: A Real Problem, or a typical Scientistic Myth? If England has a higher population density than China, and Hong Kong's is higher than Bangladesh, then maybe the real problems are not related to any over - population problem.
The Enlightenment and Scientism advance at the expense of Western Civilization. From Voltaire to Enlightenment and Scientism to Modernism, the ill-informed cheer the process along even as it destroys Western Culture.
"There is no such thing as Scientism" say those who practice it. If Scientism is a false term, then by what title to we refer to "Scientific Theory Established By Vote"?
Eco-Nazi -ism: global problems demanding global solutions, and, global mastery. The Eco-Nazi movement actually describes two movements: those who say "it's the economy, stupid" and those who say "it's the ecology, stupid."
Global warming is outed as another global consensual fraud. So what else is new? As a global consensual fraud, global warming is not the biggest, the oldest, the longest running, or the most expensive. It’s just the latest one.
Well, is it Global Cooling, or is it Global Warming? Is there any consensus? What is needed is some real Scientistic Consensus on whether we should all be screaming "Global Cooling!" or "Global Warming!" as we all run about, on queue, mindlessly waving our arms in terror.
This ain’t Health Care. It’s all a giant pile of lies. No, it isn’t really Health Care. Nothing in Obamunism is what it appears to be.
The HIV=AIDS=DEATH myth has cost many human lives and untold billions of dollars. The HIV to AIDS Myth may be the greatest and most massive international hoax since Piltdown Man. HIV=AIDS=DEATH is the formula, but where, pray tell, is there any empirical evidence at all supporting it?
A fatal false premise is a deadly logical trap for the mal-educated person. A Fatal false premise with broad general consensus will always trump reason, evidence and critical thinking.
Against the great Communist Lie; the old, current and newer forms. Our argument: The whole “Communist Dream” is a lie; the history of “Communist Revolution” is a lie; virtually everything about Communism is just a big elaborate flagrant categorical lie.
Silly premises built on crumbling foundations: Global Villageism & Evolutionism. The Dem Global-Villagers insist the US Constitution was written to cover all citizens of Earth; Disciples of Scientism and Evolutionism all genuflect before their high priest, Richard Dawkins.
The Galileo Inquisition: Contemporary Icon for the Enlightenment and Scientism. The Galileo Inquisition was no small affair at the time, but over the centuries it has grown and become a club with which to beat the Church, and to promote the myth of the "Dark" ages.
Click the image above to
publish your essay or article here,
to be included among those below.
Special Articles and
(Note: copyrights on these articles wherever present will supersede the WebSite copyright at the bottom footer of every WebPage)
Faith, from the Easter series on the Three Theological Virtues. The virtue of Faith; One of the Seven Heavenly Virtues.
Hope, from the Easter series on the Three Theological Virtues. The virtue of Hope; One of the Seven Heavenly Virtues.
Love, from the Easter series on the Three Theological Virtues. The virtue of Love; One of the Seven Heavenly Virtues.
Prudence, from the Lenten series on the Four Cardinal Virtues. The virtue of Prudence; One of the Seven Heavenly Virtues.
Justice, from the Lenten series on the Four Cardinal Virtues. The virtue of Justice; One of the Seven Heavenly Virtues.
Temperance and Fortitude, from the Lenten series on the Four Cardinal Virtues. The virtues of Temperance and Fortitude; Two of the Seven Heavenly Virtues.
On the word Consubstantial, the Trinity and Infinity. On the Consubstantial (Single Substance) of God, and the mathematically impossible number of Infinity.
The challenge describes Capitalism as illusory and Marxism as solid. The mixture of religion just adds to the confusion of all good realists.
The Obama Ethos: Who is Barack Obama? What is his grounding, his ethos? The Obama Ethos explores Obama's grounds of being; his religious, moral and political guiding principles.
Obama the Moslem: Introducing Comrade Obama (peace be upon him.) Obama the Moslem: anti-Catholic; anti-Chrisitan; anti-Jew; anti-American.
Freedom, yes – but from whom, and to do what? Is freedom from God enslavement to the world? Is freedom from the world enslavement to God? Which is better?
The Room: Born of that still inner voice. A story about a small church pastor who erects a small room to serve as a mediation room for his parishioners.
Are Catholics Saved, by having been Born Again? The theology of salvation: Catholic vs. Protestant.
Love thy neighbor as thyself: the Law in One Sentence. Can one simple sentence contain the whole of the moral Law of God?
The Catholic call is universal; it goes out to everyone. Although the Catholic call goes out to all, man’s free will means that all will not respond.
God’s Perfect Unconditional Love meets man’s Free Will. Perfect Unconditional Love can be rejected. Liberty and free choice may be a blessing or a curse.
Of Weeds and Wheat growing together, and the eventual separation. - Weeds and wheat in the field differs from in human kind, where either one can become the other.
Why Should I Believe in God? - an article by Eugene Rudder.
On Losing You - a poem by Rosemarie A. Stone.
Our Beautiful Love - a poem by Rosemarie A. Stone.
Catholic Communism: Similarities between Church Hierarchy and Pure Bureaucracy. Mises said that Communism equals Bureaucracy; the Church is a bureaucracy, therefore we have Catholic Communism. True?
The Source of Anxiety: Improper Priorities. Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness.
“I, Pencil … ”; Capitalism in a Nutshell. Leonard E. Read
Endless Concessions to the Palestinians Pamela Levene
The Peace Treaty Sajid Ali Khan
Leftist Politics in Catholic Mass Mark Brumbaugh
The USCCB Flip-Flop Mark Brumbaugh
Open Letter to Daniel Cardinal DiNardo Mark Brumbaugh
The Gift Bearers Michael from Florida
Dear Vic And Others ... John Felland
The Church Is Rotten To The Core Michelle Lobdell
Hatred of Palin Janet Morana
Proper Catechesis Susan Greve
Who is Barack Obama? Pastor Robert Legg Greve
Limited War Doctrine Colonel Thomas Snodgrass
Rabbi Meir Kahane's Letter Rabbi Meir Kahane, OBM
Solzhenitsyn Speaks Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn addresses the AFL/CIO.
The American Constitution (American Founding Fathers)
American Democrat Party Platform Karl Marx and Frederick Engles
Prof. Libor Brom
Re The Sin Of Scandal Phil Lange
Marxist Infiltration into Catholic Thought Nancy Libert
New "race and racism" thread begun by Stephen from VT. On race and racism: the ever changing definition and generic usage of the word "racism."
The Bush War Doctrine Revisited: a fresh look at our horrible situation. A reproduction of the "Bush War Doctrine Revisited" article and discussion points by David Yerushalmi; there is much food for thought here.
Resignation of Benedict XVI and the Immediate Media Firestorm. The resignation of Pope Benedict XVI and Rev. Marcel Guarnizo's interview with the author that caused the international media frenzy.
The Jewish Shabbat. Description of Jewish Shabbat (Sabbath) from my Holy Land item supplier.
Kerry's Lies: The Old, Vietnam-Era Anti-War Chickens are Comming Home to Roost. POW Lawsuit Could Force Kerry To Come Clean - by George "Bud" Day, Chairman, Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation.
Just Laws for a Godly Nation. Many nations today still lack a core of just laws for a Godly nation.
What does the World Wildlife Fund have to do with World Youth Day? An unholy alliance between the Leftist WWF and the Vatican?
False Flag: Serious-minded fiction creating a better understanding of 9/11. Can serious-minded fiction play a role in creating a better understanding of critical contemporary social/political issues like 9/11?
Bringing the Liturgy Back to the Real Vatican II. Cardinal Burke Comments on Sacra Liturgia Conference
Layman letter to all bishops. Letter to Bishops from Mariann / Mary's Child
Fetal-Microchimerism gives new meaning to the bonding of Motherhood. How the unborn child blesses the mother and physically changes her, for the rest of her life.
Ars celebrandi et adorandi - Pastoral Letter from Bishop Thomas John Paprocki. With Ars celebrandi et adorandi, all Springfield IL Catholic Parishes move Jesus back to the center of life! YES!
To be, or not no be lukewarm; that is the question. Whether tis nobler to fight the good fight, or just smile and be nice ...
Technology: a Two Edged Sword. Technology can be used for good, or for evil.
More American Imperial Edicts Issuing Forth out of Obamunism. Archbishop Schnurr joins Rick Santorum in identifying American Imperial Edicts from this administration.
Benedict XVI's Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum; Apostolic letter on 1962 Rite.
The Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum confirms the 1962 Latin Rite as the 'Extraordinary' Roman Liturgical Rite.
The Pope's Letter to Bishops on Summorum Pontificum. Benedict XVI's Letter to Bishops on Summorum Pontificum issued the same day as the Motu Proprio.
The Explanatory Note on Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum. An 'Explanatory Note on Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum' issued by the Vatican.
A concerned Catholic spotlights Catholic funded Alinsky organizations. The Alinskyite Gamaliel Foundation underpins multiple Catholic funded Alinsky organizations.
From Shane Leslie Mattison, whose father was Elden Mattison Woolliams. Annecdotes from Shane Leslie Mattison.
Dr. Ben Carson, Champion of God, Family, Country and Decency in Government. Ben Carson can return America to being a Constitutional Republic once again.
A submission from someone who would be Pope. If all the last five or so Popes have been invalid Popes, then, where's the valid one? Why, Brother Michael, of course!
If you can't find the page you're looking for, try the