Thank you for this clarification. I never paid much attention to the AIDS thing in its heyday. I wasn't the threatened demographic but could smell a pharmaceutical scam from my distance. As one of your new readers (Dr Bailey brought me) thank you for the confirmation. Same players, same play book.
I've been following Celia Farber for some time and she primed me for your profound proclamation that AIDS was the clinical trial for covid. However, I was already halfway there from the Swineflu case-demic in the early 2000s, which opened my eyes to the whole house of cards vax issue...and here we go again. Thank you, Rebecca, for your tenacious perseverance!
The scientific approach to everything is to say, at best, "we are 99% certain that *something* does not exist but there is always the chance that in the future the 1% may happen"
The common sense approach is "no evidence has been presented, at all, ever, for the existence of *something* therefore it does not exist."
I go for the second because I don't mind being wrong on this kind of thing, and changing my mind, my view, IF any evidence ever surfaced.
Given that it has been more than a century since this entire 'virus' fraud began and still not an iota of evidence, I will happily say, HIV does not exist. ditto for any and all other 'virus' claims.
As a mathematician, I’m extremely careful about the language I use. Having said that, the evidence for “HIV” being an exogenous virus is very thin indeed. You’d think in forty years, they could do a better job.
I cannot come out and say “HIV does not exist” because I cannot prove this statement. This likely comes from my being a mathematician; we are extremely careful with language because—and this is critically important—if we weren’t the field would collapse, cease to exist entirely and never be taken seriously again. Perhaps the best way to state what I think is true would be “I have yet to see evidence that HIV exists as an exogenous virus.”
New subscriber here. Thank you for this clarification. I myself do not agree with you and think that the "philosophical argument" would tear down everything automatically. I think the Ghostbusters series called the End of Virology is very relevant here. It's all quackery science. Nonetheless, I do appreciate your work very much and think that we are all on the same team. So Thank You!
I have a question. You said "But AIDS will never be solved if we continue to chase after the red herring of HIV, whose role in AIDS has long since been nullified"
Can you please expound on the notion that AIDS needs to be solved? Don't we already know that the life style of doing drugs, lacking sleep, not eating well all lead to a state of immunodeficiency. Don't we already know that the Amyl Nitrate in Poppers (aphrodisiac used in the gay community) is what causes Kaposi Sarcoma. Also, the lack of food, adequate shelter and clean drinking water in some parts of Africa is what is causing the immunodeficiency in Africa. Do you mind elaborating on which part of AIDS needs to be solved?
When I say AIDS I mean the umbrella of weird immune deficiencies that are becoming increasingly common, like lupus and Lyme disease. They’re exploding out of nowhere and are clearly immune disorders. I actually don’t even think the current epidemic of immune deficiency is the same as the AIDS from about 1980-1993.
Thank you for this clarification. I never paid much attention to the AIDS thing in its heyday. I wasn't the threatened demographic but could smell a pharmaceutical scam from my distance. As one of your new readers (Dr Bailey brought me) thank you for the confirmation. Same players, same play book.
Thank you for being here! I really appreciate it!
I've been following Celia Farber for some time and she primed me for your profound proclamation that AIDS was the clinical trial for covid. However, I was already halfway there from the Swineflu case-demic in the early 2000s, which opened my eyes to the whole house of cards vax issue...and here we go again. Thank you, Rebecca, for your tenacious perseverance!
The scientific approach to everything is to say, at best, "we are 99% certain that *something* does not exist but there is always the chance that in the future the 1% may happen"
The common sense approach is "no evidence has been presented, at all, ever, for the existence of *something* therefore it does not exist."
I go for the second because I don't mind being wrong on this kind of thing, and changing my mind, my view, IF any evidence ever surfaced.
Given that it has been more than a century since this entire 'virus' fraud began and still not an iota of evidence, I will happily say, HIV does not exist. ditto for any and all other 'virus' claims.
As a mathematician, I’m extremely careful about the language I use. Having said that, the evidence for “HIV” being an exogenous virus is very thin indeed. You’d think in forty years, they could do a better job.
Yes like Come out with it directly and stop pissing around with careful words and say that HIV DOES NOT EXIST.
I cannot come out and say “HIV does not exist” because I cannot prove this statement. This likely comes from my being a mathematician; we are extremely careful with language because—and this is critically important—if we weren’t the field would collapse, cease to exist entirely and never be taken seriously again. Perhaps the best way to state what I think is true would be “I have yet to see evidence that HIV exists as an exogenous virus.”
It's "something", just not an evil villain attacking me to DEATH, that they want to blame every fucking "medical" problem I have on.
Perth science was quality.
Absolutely correct.
Thanks for taking on this behemoth. One of the courageous ones 👊🏻
New subscriber here. Thank you for this clarification. I myself do not agree with you and think that the "philosophical argument" would tear down everything automatically. I think the Ghostbusters series called the End of Virology is very relevant here. It's all quackery science. Nonetheless, I do appreciate your work very much and think that we are all on the same team. So Thank You!
I have a question. You said "But AIDS will never be solved if we continue to chase after the red herring of HIV, whose role in AIDS has long since been nullified"
Can you please expound on the notion that AIDS needs to be solved? Don't we already know that the life style of doing drugs, lacking sleep, not eating well all lead to a state of immunodeficiency. Don't we already know that the Amyl Nitrate in Poppers (aphrodisiac used in the gay community) is what causes Kaposi Sarcoma. Also, the lack of food, adequate shelter and clean drinking water in some parts of Africa is what is causing the immunodeficiency in Africa. Do you mind elaborating on which part of AIDS needs to be solved?
Thank you.
There’s a reason these disorders are becoming commonplace, and it would be nice to know why.
When I say AIDS I mean the umbrella of weird immune deficiencies that are becoming increasingly common, like lupus and Lyme disease. They’re exploding out of nowhere and are clearly immune disorders. I actually don’t even think the current epidemic of immune deficiency is the same as the AIDS from about 1980-1993.
All the LIES need to be solved
I did but it was years ago. I need to read it again.