Damned Heretics

Condemned by the established, but very often right

I am Nicolaus Copernicus, and I approve of this blog

I am Richard Feynman and I approve of this blog

Qualified outsiders and maverick insiders are often right about the need to replace received wisdom in science and society, as the history of the Nobel prize shows. This blog exists to back the best of them in their uphill assault on the massively entrenched edifice of resistance to and prejudice against reviewing, let alone revising, ruling ideas. In support of such qualified dissenters and courageous heretics we search for scientific paradigms and other established beliefs which may be maintained only by the power and politics of the status quo, comparing them with academic research and the published experimental and investigative record.

We especially defend and support the funding of honest, accomplished, independent minded and often heroic scientists, inventors and other original thinkers and their right to free speech and publication against the censorship, mudslinging, false arguments, ad hominem propaganda, overwhelming crowd prejudice and internal science politics of the paradigm wars of cancer, AIDS, evolution, global warming, cosmology, particle physics, macroeconomics, health and medicine, diet and nutrition.

HONOR ROLL OF SCIENTIFIC TRUTHSEEKERS

Henry Bauer, Peter Breggin , Harvey Bialy, Giordano Bruno, Erwin Chargaff, Nicolaus Copernicus, Francis Crick, Paul Crutzen, Marie Curie, Rebecca Culshaw, Freeman Dyson, Peter Duesberg, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman, John Fewster, Galileo Galilei, Alec Gordon, James Hansen, Edward Jenner, Benjamin Jesty, Michio Kaku, Adrian Kent, Ernst Krebs, Thomas Kuhn, Serge Lang, John Lauritsen, Mark Leggett, Richard Lindzen, Lynn Margulis, Barbara McClintock, George Miklos, Marco Mamone Capria, Peter Medawar, Kary Mullis, Linus Pauling, Eric Penrose, Max Planck, Rainer Plaga, David Rasnick, Sherwood Rowland, Carl Sagan, Otto Rossler, Fred Singer, Thomas Szasz, Alfred Wegener, Edward O. Wilson, James Watson.
----------------------------------------------

Many people would die rather than think – in fact, they do so. – Bertrand Russell.

Skepticism is dangerous. That’s exactly its function, in my view. It is the business of skepticism to be dangerous. And that’s why there is a great reluctance to teach it in schools. That’s why you don’t find a general fluency in skepticism in the media. On the other hand, how will we negotiate a very perilous future if we don’t have the elementary intellectual tools to ask searching questions of those nominally in charge, especially in a democracy? – Carl Sagan (The Burden of Skepticism, keynote address to CSICOP Annual Conference, Pasadena, April 3/4, 1982).

It is really important to underscore that everything we’re talking about tonight could be utter nonsense. – Brian Greene (NYU panel on Hidden Dimensions June 5 2010, World Science Festival)

I am Albert Einstein, and I heartily approve of this blog, insofar as it seems to believe both in science and the importance of intellectual imagination, uncompromised by out of date emotions such as the impulse toward conventional religious beliefs, national aggression as a part of patriotism, and so on.   As I once remarked, the further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.   Certainly the application of the impulse toward blind faith in science whereby authority is treated as some kind of church is to be deplored.  As I have also said, the only thing ever interfered with my learning was my education. My name as you already perceive without a doubt is George Bernard Shaw, and I certainly approve of this blog, in that its guiding spirit appears to be blasphemous in regard to the High Church doctrines of science, and it flouts the censorship of the powers that be, and as I have famously remarked, all great truths begin as blasphemy, and the first duty of the truthteller is to fight censorship, and while I notice that its seriousness of purpose is often alleviated by a satirical irony which sometimes borders on the facetious, this is all to the good, for as I have also famously remarked, if you wish to be a dissenter, make certain that you frame your ideas in jest, otherwise they will seek to kill you.  My own method was always to take the utmost trouble to find the right thing to say, and then to say it with the utmost levity. (Photo by Alfred Eisenstaedt for Life magazine) One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison, but anything that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary tyranny, and is likely to interfere with happiness in all kinds of ways. – Bertrand Russell, Conquest of Happiness (1930) ch. 9

(Click for more Unusual Quotations on Science and Belief)

BEST VIEWED IN LARGE FONT
Expanded GUIDE TO SITE PURPOSE AND LAYOUT is in the lower blue section at the bottom of every home page.

HIV on trial in court down under


Appeal for ‘HIV murder’ being argued on rethinker grounds, gaining media coverage

Spurs ultimate fantasy of trial for HIV proponents for iatrogenic genocide

Thrilling news on “Hank’s You Bet Your Life” today, see Wrongful Sentence: HIV Finally on Trial in Australia”. Theoretical arguments for and against the HIV∫AIDS paradigm are being aired in court this week in Adelaide, Australia, as a judge determines whether a case will be permitted to go to appeal.

Otis, who is apparently now running Barnesworld under the direction of Dr Harvey Bialy, will be getting a blow by blow account filed by a reader, ‘Hollywood’, over the next two days. According to the news reports so far, the defense lawyers for a HIV+man convicted of endangering women by sleeping with them are arguing to be allowed to appeal on two main grounds: that HIV cannot be transferred through heterosexual sex, as studies show, and that proof is lacking that HIV actually exists.

We doubt that the second argument will get very far, since few other people can understand it fully and even Peter Duesberg says it is wrong. But the first one is proven by mainstream studies which cannot be dismissed, and are hard to interpret any other way, even though the HIV∫AIDS faithful try valiantly to do so, as Nancy Padian now does on the authoritatively misleading AIDS Truth website.

Moreover, this is a court and the minds involved are legal eagles who can think analytically better than most scientists, certainly those in HIV∫AIDS, so the Padian imitation of a pretzel won’t wash.

/////////////////////////////////////////////

Newsflash

Wed Oct 24: The likelihood of the case being decided on the narrow legal ground of whether the law has been adhered to or not suggests that the prisoner will not get off, because he knew that if he was told he was HIV positive, he had to tell his female partners, and he didn’t, and whether the science and the law was justified or not is irrelevant.

However, according to a Comment by Marcos Andrin of Argentina on the site of AdelaideNow a court decision in Argentina in 1997 did let five doctors go free on the grounds that there is no proof that HIV causes AIDS:

This is no news for me. In 1997 one Court of Appeals in my country declared not guilty 5 doctors who were acussed of infecting several patients during a dialisis procedure. The court said “there is no scientific proof that HIV is the cause of AIDS”….

Posted by: Marcos Andrin of Argentina 12:12am today

Marcos, if you read this, please let us know more.

////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Meanwhile Australian health officials are on the alert, worried that the case may undermine two decades of ‘safe sex’. Obviously, the prosecutor will attack the credentials of the members of the Perth Group who will testify, Valentine Turner and Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos. But this will probably be in vain.

Check out the affidavit from Turner that the case is based on at the Rethinking AIDS site, Affidavit. It shows respectable credentials and is a written and well argued compendium of problems with the paradigm. We think the court is likely to find it intelligible, and perhaps the media too. The case seems likely to proceed to appeal, where the arguments will be fully aired in public.

This advance to a new airing of rethinker arguments in the courts realizes the hopes and plans which were discussed by Rethinking AIDS, the Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of HIV∫AIDS, when they met in New York City in early June. A teleconference call was mounted with lawyers in Australia and the US and Canada to share ideas and information.

As Dean Esmay comments at Barnesworld, however, it will be an uphill battle to get anti-HIV arguments to be taken seriously when the overwhelming consensus is thought to be against them. “Without trying to be negative, I expect the courts will determine that the “scientific consensus” is enough to keep the man convicted, and that the existence of scientific dissenters is not enough to overturn a conviction.”

However, the full airing of the arguments and the new basis for reporters to convey some of them to the public will surely grant additional respectability and currency to them unless the prosecutor manages to trash the credentials of Turner and Papadouplos entirely, which doesn’t seem likely given the quality of the affidavit, their success in publishing in peer reviewed journals, and their respectable status as members of the Australian medical community.

Even so, any respect from the media will be grudging. Already, you can see how editors will treat the Perth experts – by putting ‘experts’ in quotes of questionability, as they have done in the headline below.

Nonetheless, this is the HIV∫AIDS cliffhanger of the week and probably of the next few months, and it represents what may be the first big step along a path that could lead to the legal, business and political communities becoming aware that the scientific leaders of HIVAIDS have pulled a fast one, and sacrificed many lives to boot.

In that case, as we have speculated before, it may well be that the officials and scientists who have crippled and prevented proper scientific debate and review both inside the field and outside it for twenty years may have to answer for it in the court of public opinion, in hearings on the Hill and perhaps even in the courts of law, though the latter seems a stretch.

But with the leaders of WorldCom and Enron drawing sentences of 25 years and 24 years respectively, perhaps it is not inconceivable. HIV∫AIDS is, after all, the Enron of science.

We’d suggest that Dr Anthony Fauci and Dr Robert Gallo, at least, should buy condominiums in Rio or Macao, just in case.

See Man to challenge existence of HIV in courtin Australian Yahoo.

(show)

Tuesday October 24, 02:10 PM

Man to challenge existence of HIV in court

An HIV positive man convicted of endangering the lives of three former partners through unprotected sex is appealing against his conviction, claiming the HIV virus does not really exist.

It is believed to be the first time the existence of HIV has been challenged in a court of law.

Andre Chad Parenzee is awaiting sentence for having unprotected sex with three women who were unaware he was carrying the HIV virus.

But his lawyer, Kevin Borick, today argued that Parenzee’s conviction should be quashed because there is no scientific proof that HIV actually exists.

Mr Borick will call evidence from two Western Australian based scientists, who will argue that the virus has never been isolated, current testing regimes are inconclusive and that there is no proof HIV is transmitted sexually.

Prosecutors plan to call evidence from five HIV experts, who will claim that Parenzee’s defence argument was debunked by the scientific community in the 1980s.

HIV, sex not linked, ‘experts’ tell court from Adelaide Now.

(show)

HIV, sex not linked, ‘experts’ tell court

COLIN JAMES, LEGAL AFFAIRS EDITOR

October 25, 2006 12:15am

Article from:

Font size: + –

Send this article: Print Email

SOUTH Australian prosecutors have been forced to defend claims made by a prominent lawyer that HIV cannot be spread by sexual contact.

Criminal barrister Kevin Borick, QC, yesterday began a four-day hearing in the Supreme Court in a bid to prove HIV – which causes AIDS – is not transmitted sexually.

Mr Borick is seeking leave to appeal against the conviction of an Adelaide man, Andre Chad Parenzee, 35, who had unprotected sex with three women despite knowing he was infected with HIV.

The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions has spent several months gathering scientific evidence to refute claims made by two “experts” engaged by Mr Borick that HIV cannot be sexually transmitted.

The pair – physicist Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos and emergency physician Dr Valender Turner – are part of an organisation called the Perth Group, which has spent two decades trying to overturn scientific findings on HIV.

The case is being closely monitored by state and federal health officials, who are concerned it could undermine more than two decades of public education about the need to practice safe sex.

In his opening address yesterday, Mr Borick told Justice John Sulan it was “the first time a Supreme Court has been required to consider the evidence on this issue and to deliver judgment”.

“No evidence for sexual transmission of HIV can be found even in the best conducted studies published from the United Kingdom, Europe, the United States of America and Africa,” he said.

“The evidence and arguments we will advance in support of the basic propositions are not new. In fact, they first surfaced shortly after the claim HIV was ‘discovered’ in 1983.

“The reaction from the relevant scientific community and the medical community is one of disbelief.”

Mrs Papadopulos-Eleopulos, from the Royal Perth Hospital, yesterday spent several hours using a slide presentation to explain to Justice Sulan her long-standing theory on why HIV cannot be sexually transmitted.

The case will continue today with evidence from Dr Turner, a part-time consultant with the Western Australia Department of Health, on why the testing for HIV is allegedly flawed and inaccurate.

10 Responses to “HIV on trial in court down under”

  1. Gene Semon Says:

    It seems to me that Val Turner’s expertise qualifies him as the world’s leading authority on cross-reactive antibodies, a problem ignored for years by our biomedical establishment and at the heart of the “Baltimore Affair”.

    This was not a “personnel problem”, but a cover-up of Imanishi-Kari’s incomprehension of anti-anti-idiotypes and other facets of molecular mimicry. Perhaps not “fraud”, as Margot O’Toole charged, but they were in over their heads. The ongoing problem, when does the “massaging” of data turn into fraud, is still with us.

    It’s also a safe bet that Eleni is quite aware of the devil that’s in the details of “retroviral infections”, i.e. forensic equivalency with Peter Duesberg’s conclusions.

    What clearly doesn’t exist is a wild-type uniquely unique sexually transmitted ultimate destoyer that somehow – they still can’t tell us in all the thousands and thousands of papers – hijacks the transcriptional apparatus of a eukaryotic cell. If there was such a thing, eukaryotic life wouldn’t exist. (See pages 72, 152 and especially 174 – we have co-evolved with every possible type of retrovirus – of Harvey’s book.)

  2. Truthseeker Says:

    The Baltimore Affair as we understand it hinged on O’Toole’s discovery that the requisite experiment had not in fact been done. But you seem to be saying that it was a matter of false interpretation of results.

    The charge was research fraud and it stuck because the Secret Service (yes, the US has a Secret Service!) showed that the data entries were forged at a later date. Baltimore was viewed as a skunk for trying to cover up the O’Toole revelation that the experiment had not been done, preferring to censor O’Toole and prevent her from working in science rather than admit the paper was wrong and withdraw it. That is why he was forced by essentially unanimous peer disapproval to leave the presidency of Rockefeller University, despite $20 million backing from Nelson Rockefeller.

    His subsequent rehabilitation by a obsequious biographer and his restoration to the more or less equal throne of CalTech president was based on the decision of the prosecutors not to proceed with a case against Imanishi-Kiri, because of the difficulties involved, which seem to be that the Secret Service analysis could be disputed.

    But there never seems to have been any dispute that the results of the Cell paper were spurious, and the paper should have been withdrawn, as it was by Baltimore until he then changed his mind. Serge Lang’s analysis in Challenges made his responsibility for protecting bad science clear. As a reliable source Challenges is unequalled, and indispensable, on both Baltimore’s and Gallo’s shenanigans.

    Walter Gilbert’s reaction to Baltimore’s “unretraction” was
    “unpublishable”, he told Science. “It’s such foolishness I can’t believe it.”

    Meanwhile, as far as cross reactions go, Robert Houston reports he has found papers which demonstrate that the placenta manufactures proteins which cross react with HIV tests.

  3. Truthseeker Says:

    Added a PS to the post:

    Newsflash
    Wed Oct 24: The likelihood of the case being decided on the narrow legal ground of whether the law has been adhered to or not suggests that the prisoner will not get off, because he knew that if he was told he was HIV positive, he had to tell his female partners, and he didn’t, and whether the science and the law was justified or not is irrelevant.

    However, according to a Comment by Marcos Andrin of Argentina on the site of AdelaideNow a court decision in Argentina in 1997 did let five doctors go free on the grounds that there is no proof that HIV causes AIDS:

    This is no news for me. In 1997 one Court of Appeals in my country declared not guilty 5 doctors who were acussed of infecting several patients during a dialisis procedure. The court said “there is no scientific proof that HIV is the cause of AIDS”….
    Posted by: Marcos Andrin of Argentina 12:12am today

    Marcos, if you read this, please let us know more.

  4. Marcos Says:

    Yes… As I said… this is no news for me. As you may imagine, this case didn´t have any coverage in the mass media. They just simply almost ignored it.
    But I remember the news. So today I´ve spoken to one of the judges who was involved in that case.
    He offered me a copy of the sentence and some other documents that appear in the case files.
    I´ve arranged an appointment with him for tomorrow morning.
    So, I´ll have the chance to talk with him and get those papers back to my office.
    If I find them useful, I will send them to the Australian lawyer.
    It seems to me that the aussie case is really good chance to start debunking the house of cards… But AIDS INC. is very aware of it too. So, we must be prepared for strange things to happen.

  5. Truthseeker Says:

    Well, let us know too, if you would. Exciting stuff.

  6. kevin Says:

    Marcos:
    If I find them useful, I will send them to the Australian lawyer.

    Precedent is always useful to a lawyer. You might ought to send them and see if he finds them useful.

  7. Dave Says:

    United Press International has picked up the story, linked by The Drudge Report

  8. Martel Says:

    Yes, Drudge links it…his headline is: “HIV” to go on trial in Aussie court. Interesting.
    Also fascinating is how the UPI story calls the two Perth scientists “self-styled scientific researchers.” I wonder if the “self-styled journalist” here actually looked up Val &Eleni, their work, their publications, or the affidavit in the case. Probably not. S/he probably wouldn’t know gp41 from hair gel in any case.

  9. Truthseeker Says:

    The Australian ran a story callingthe claims of the Perth duo “insane”:

    Doubts on HIV’s existence ‘insane’
    Clara Pirani, Medical reporter
    27 October 2006

    AIDS experts have labelled claims by a Perth researcher that HIV does not exist as outrageous and dangerous nonsense.

    Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos, a medical engineer at Royal Perth Hospital, said on Wednesday that HIV was not a retrovirus and could not be transmitted by sexual intercourse.

    At a leave-to-appeal hearing on behalf of Andre Chad Parenzee – an HIV-positive man convicted of endangering the lives of three girlfriends and sentenced to 15 years in prison – Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos said the existence of HIV had yet to be proved. She is a founder of the Perth Group of researchers who argue AIDS is not linked to HIV.

    Andrew Grulich, associate professor in epidemiology at the National Centre in HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research, described the group’s claims as “insane”.

    “They have a very long and convoluted argument that has been comprehensively disproved many times,” he said.

    A spokeswoman for the Royal Perth Hospital said yesterday that the hospital did not share the views of Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos. She said Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos did not work in HIV research or with AIDS patients.

    Professor Grulich said the evidence that HIV exists was irrefutable. “How did the death rate from HIV and AIDS drop from 1000 a year to less than 200 a year in the space of one to two years when those drugs were introduced, unless there is a virus that these drugs are targeting?” he said.

    “What they say is outrageous and quite dangerous because it encourages people to not be concerned about transmission.”

    Ms Papadopulos-Eleopulos said the techniques used by Luc Montagnier and Robert Gallo, the scientists who discovered HIV in 1983, were flawed.

    However, David Harrich, a molecular virologist from the Queensland Institute of Medical Research, said their techniques had been re-tested and verified many times since 1983.

    (From David Crowe)

  10. james Says:

    “Professor Grulich said the evidence that HIV exists was irrefutable. “How did the death rate from HIV and AIDS drop from 1000 a year to less than 200 a year in the space of one to two years when those drugs were introduced, unless there is a virus that these drugs are targeting?” he said. ”

    “anti-hiv” drugs are not specific, they have broad spectrum antimicrobial effects that treat directley “oppurtunistic-infection/O.I’s” independant of “viral-load”, “cd4”.
    They treat candida albicans, Kaposi Sarcoma, “pcp”, and all the other “O.I’s” that can be called “aids” sometimes with or without “hiv” presence and independant of “viral-load” and “cd4”.

    P.I’s have anti apotosis effects and an sustain and even increase “cd4” regardless of “viral-load”, they reduce apoptosis induced by classic oxidizers like AZT, radiation, hydrogen peroxide, morphine.

    The arguement used above implying that the proof that “hiv” exists, or that “hiv” causes “aids” or that the diseases that can be called “aids” sometimes are caused by “aquired immune defiency/low cd4” is proved by the “effectiveness” of “antiretrovirals/arv’s” is invalid and any scientist examining mainstream scientific and medical literature should know that.

    Make sure you start at the begging of the thread this involves clicking on “first at the end of the first post in this thread otherwise you will not see dozens and dozens of papers demostrating that “arv” drugs have direct effects against “O.I’s” that can be called “aids” sometimes regardless of “viral-load” with or without “hiv” presence” and that P.I’s have oxidative stimuli reducing properties and decrease apoptosis and increase or sustain “cd4” INDEPEBNDANT of “hiv” presence or non presence and regardless of “viral-load”.

    ceramide,apoptosis,antioxidants,”cd4″,Atrophy,combo?

    Copy and paste url
    http://groups.msn.com/AIDSMythExposed /healthissues.msnw?action=get_ message&mview= 0&ID_Message=15539&Last Modifie d=4675578433523845842

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Bad Behavior has blocked 302 access attempts in the last 7 days.