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.


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)

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

Kenneth Cole sets the new trend: “we all need an HIV test”

A friend sent the following url, a gateway to a video on AOL (use Safari on Macs) presenting Kenneth Cole’s new effort to engender more sympathy for all who carry the real burden of the HIV?AIDS paradigm, ie those that score positive on an HIV test, whatever that may mean scientifically (see previous post).

http://us.video.aol.com/video.index.adp?mode=2&guideContext=65.73&pmmsid=1436144″>Kenneth Cole: “We All Have AIDS”

The clip is from ABC News, reporting a new AIDS campaign with the sensational slogan “We All Have AIDS.” The leader is shoe designer Kenneth Cole, who believes that we should all view ourselves as one with all who “have AIDS”, because we all are human, and we all might very well get it. More specifically, underlying this feeling of solidarity, he explains, is the “shocking fact that 90 per cent of those who have HIV don’t know it,” because they haven’t been tested.

In other words, Cole’s idea is that the whole world should take an HIV test. Perhaps we are too cynical but we can see why this goal might be promoted by those who want to draw funding for AIDS. Mainstream science has now shown that it is in fact almost entirely uninfectious from man to woman. Expanding testing into the heterosexual community will keep up AIDS numbers, and therefore funding, by finding the 1 in 330 heterosexuals who supposedly are carrying the virus (antibodies) unawares.

By no coincidence Cole is the chairperson of AMFAR. He succeeded Mathilde Krim, the blonde scientist-socialite who parlayed the role into a charity friendship with Liz Taylor. He is presumably keen that the entire population of nearly 300 million souls in the US should be tested, so that the 98,000 known “HIV positives” in this country can be expanded to the full million or so the CDC has always told us live here. The more the merrier as far as AMFAR funding is concerned, to be sure.

(How this total of around a million of these HIV+ unfortunates has held steady throughout the twenty years of AIDS in the US, yet given rise to an expanding and then contracting AIDS epidemic ie how a steady prevalence correlates with a rise and then fall of illness and deaths from AIDS over the same period is one of the great mysteries of AIDS, as yet explained by the HIV=AIDS theorists.

Even if the fall in AIDS deaths in the US over the last decade was explained by newly effective medications in the nineties (it isn’t very well, since it doesn’t coincide precisely, and the literature records the new cocktails cause all kinds of unpleasant side effects including in the end death) the complete absence of any initial rapid expansion of HIV in the population at the beginning of the US epidemic is quite unexplained).

“Thank you very much Kenneth,this is really extraordinary, what an effort, we appreciate it,” says Katie Curran, ending the news segment in the ABC news video.

So why are we not joining in the applause?

One reason is we always find it hard to take the behavior of celebrities in their enthusiasm for advocating AIDS as a cause at face value. Why are they always so earnestly energized by it when they so long ignored much greater ills of mankind? The answer is superficially obvious, of course. Supporting efforts to conquer AIDS is still a win-win situation for any public personality.

Many people with AIDS have been prominent in the arts and its activists have won much more political attention than lobbyists for bigger diseases such as cancer and heart attacks. As long as AIDS remains in the national spotlight, those who crave media attention cannot go wrong in publicising the cause, since they will be near the front of the national stage and bathed in media illumination as well as politically correctness, though perhaps not quite as brightly as in the past.

But if you contemplate the scene long enough it seems that there are more complex psychological factors at work. A strange beatification of AIDS activists occurs, as if they were haloed by their association with AIDS. It is not so much the publicity seeking as the internal moral conviction which takes over. Psychiatrically speaking, one senses they are escaping the earthly threat by transcending it with exemplary, quasi-saintly behavior. They enter a moral heaven to escape a terrestial dragon, as it were.

How else to explain the almost ecstatic joy that seemed to overcome the UN official on the PBS McNeil Lehrer News Hour on the night of World AIDS Day evening (Thus Dec 1), As he described the progress he imagined was being made against AIDS worldwide even as it was spreading far and wide across the globe he seemed lit up by an ineffable joy, flashing ever brighter smiles in striking contrast to the dark underlying topic. As it serves to justify ever larger amounts of funding, HIV-AIDS also allows second level functionaries and minor celebrties of all kinds to assume the mantel of a savior.

All this heavenly St Elmo’s fire of haloed sainthood is now attaching itself to the latest idea being sold by the AIDS establishment, the movement now spearheaded by Cole, that all of us should be tested for HIV, and know our “status”.

Giving Kenneth the boot

Excuse our lack of enthusiasm, but if the unending and so far unanswered scientific review critique of HIV?AIDS is correct, the last thing we would sign up for is a voluntary HIV test. According to the reviewers it is meaningless, merely serving the purpose of those who wish to administer lethal AIDS drugs in order to “save your life” for the short while before you lose it altogether.

Not to mention the news recently noted here which includes more than one report of people being prosecuted for murder for making love to partners whom they forgot to tell they were rated positive for HIV.


Australian News – Courier-Mail


Ex-lover on trial for HIV infection

Amanda Watt


A QUEENSLAND man on trial for deliberately infecting his gay lover with HIV was a “highly infectious” carrier of the virus when he allegedly transmitted the disease, Brisbane District Court was told.

The Crown alleges the man, 37, who cannot be named, had been HIV positive since 1987 but lied about it to his new boyfriend during their two-month relationship in 2003, ultimately infecting him with the deadly virus.

The accused man has pleaded not guilty.

The victim, 42, who also cannot be named, told the jury on Tuesday that he was always concerned about the HIV virus but was reassured by his lover before they had sex – and then repeatedly during their relationship – that he had been tested and had the all-clear.

But the victim said after becoming ill a month into the relationship he sought medical help and was eventually diagnosed as being HIV positive.

He said the pair always had unprotected sex – something he would never have agreed to if he knew the true status of his partner’s health.

“He kept on telling me it was fine because he was HIV negative,” the man said.

“I wouldn’t have gone to bed (with him) if he was HIV positive – with or without a condom.”

The victim’s previous lover is not a HIV carrier and the victim claims intravenous drug use and needle stick injury can be ruled out as possible causes.

Yesterday, infectious diseases specialist Associate Professor James McCarthy told the jury he believed the victim was most probably infected in late January or February 2004 – which is soon after the men began their sexual relationship.

He also said the accused man’s hospital file showed he told staff last year that he had never undergone treatment for his HIV virus – which made him “highly infectious with a very high viral load”.

In a police interview played to the court on Tuesday, the accused repeatedly denied he had kept his HIV status a secret.

The jury is expected to begin deliberations today.

As long as the review arguments remain the last word on HIV?AIDS in the scientific debate in the peer reviewed literature, we would suggest that Kenneth Cole may not be the best savior to listen to in deciding whether we all have AIDS or not.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Bad Behavior has blocked 300 access attempts in the last 7 days.