I don’t know what to say, he refers us to a new documentary called House of Numbers, which is apparently ‘unscientific’ according to a quick search on Google. I like everyone being able to make their case, but is Lew Rockwell’s site just becoming a haven for doubters of the hard sciences? Granted, I think that HIV/AIDS is clearly used for political and monetary gain, but does it not exist? Hmmm! Anymore creationists about?
EDIT: I probably made quite a few logical errors in my post, forgive me, it was made in haste!
Either way, this topic can be used for discussion of AIDS related things if you so wish.
EDIT AGAIN: And for those interested in the other side of the issue you can read this article by a AIDS charity:
“AIDS” is not a myth, at least the symptoms aren’t. I apologize if my post seemed an attack on anyone’s character, which it isn’t. The article stated in its title “Still not convinced that HIV is bogus?”, which is quite the claim, and yet the content therein it does not provide the hard science that you just accused me of not providing. It only states, as I do not doubt, that various groups have gained monetarily and politically from the issue. I have yet to see the documentary myself, but have read many sources on the topic, both supporting and in opposition, but it would seem that to say “HIV does not exist!” is quite the stretch. To me, its dishonesty to make a claim before the facts are in. Likewise, science is never orthodox, and as long as there are some variables to a supposed constant then there must be a fault.
I read Lewrockwell.com to get unconventional and outside the mainstream views on social issues. Since a lot of the material published is deliberately fringe, nobody agrees with everything published on the site. But it’s important they continue to publish stuff no-one else will touch with a ten-foot pole.
AIDS exists. As to whether the virus they call HIV exists, the evidence is unclear, and the evidence that HIV, rather than a toxic lifestyle, causes AIDS is unclear as well. There are a number of qualified ‘hard’ scientists who say the HIV/AIDS hypothesis is wrong.
I read the article. It is a short essay that reviews a film, not a scientific text. Links are provided for you to investigate further. Your characterization of the article and of lewrockwell.com is disingenuous.
I’ll never understand the hauteur of some libertarians. While I don’t believe everything I read on LRC, the site provides a bulwark not just against the state proper, but the statist mentality at large.
I took a brief break from LvMI earlier this year, to hang around with some of the younger established libertarian names and found a few of them to be much more narcissistic and cynical of radicalism than I could have imagined.
Decentralization happens when we push out the edges, not against the center. If you resent people with alternate theories or ideas now, then there is no hope for a peaceful libertarian culture later.
Abandon your programming. Question everything. Don’t be afraid.
If you intended, via the title, to elicit some sort of mindless emotional reaction, I do not think that you will be successful on a forum like this one.
To be honest I’m wondering if this blogger would be willing to put his money where his mouth is. What I mean is, I were to give him a needle just used by somebody HIV positive, do you think he’d poke himself with it for $10.
It’s already been done, live, in front of cameras by [if I recall correctly] either a non-believing MD or a scientist. This was maybe 5 years ago[?].
The video is probably on youtube somewhere still. I will see if I can find it. There are probably other examples.
Of course, there is no real way of knowing that the event was not staged…for the cameras, but I am personally more inclined to believe it happened “for real” at this stage [without the benefit of close analysis] simply because it directly contradicts official propaganda - but that’s just me [:)]
" Decentralization happens when we push out the edges, not against the center. If you resent people with alternate theories or ideas now, then there is no hope for a peaceful libertarian culture later.
Abandon your programming. Question everything. Don’t be afraid."
The motto for LewRockwell.com is “anti-state”. That means the site will pick up the cause of any of the state’s enemies. Now if the state is trying to demonize HIV deniers, or global warming skeptics, there’s probably something nefarious going on. That’s reason enough to blog about it.
That doesn’t mean Lew endorses or believes any of it. It just means he wants to attract attention to it. Scientific, rational stuff goes on Mises.org.
So because say, a government persecutes Christians, should I convert to Christianity? Just because the state opposes a group does not make their viewpoint valid. The question is do you battle something with ideas and discussion, or go on to use force. I didn’t mean for this topic to be a “Oh my god, look what he said!”, I wanted it to cause some discussion (as the Lew Rockwell blogger did I assume). Except, I DOUBT his DOUBT if that makes sense.
And it is probably likely that I am wrong… But I will have fun defending the unpopular position (here)