Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: On Our Darker Bioweapons Future

Expand Messages
  • kmlightseeker
    Hi Linda, Thanks, and it s amazing what information is out there. Also, that is a good link you cited from Wikipedia which summarises the positions on the
    Message 1 of 33 , May 1 9:27 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Linda,

      Thanks, and it's amazing what information is out there.

      Also, that is a good link you cited from Wikipedia which summarises
      the positions on the HIV/AIDS debate.

      Yes, absolutely, I would think a careful, objective discussion is needed.


      Thanks,

      Keith


      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Linda wrote:
      > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "kmlightseeker"
      > <kmlightseeker@y...> wrote:
      > > Hi Diana,
      > >
      > >
      > > You wrote:
      > > "[Linda:]
      > > >Since neither Karma, New Age cures and infatuations, witch doctors,
      > > >nor HIV/AIDS were the topic, but instead genetic modification of
      > > >variola---an effort that has sent alarm bells even to smallpox
      > > >scientists and *traditional* health experts----do you *think* maybe
      > > >it might make more sense to focus on the topic instead of running
      > off
      > > >like Torquemada on these mouth-foaming, wild-eyed rants? You've
      > even
      > > >thrown in "astrology" for gawdssakes.......
      > > [Diana:]
      > >
      > > HIV/AIDS came into it because I was explaining why Deborah has no
      > > credibility with me when she posts hints that she's found another
      > > scientific conspiracy. I have *no respect* for the promotion of this
      > > nonsense. Anti-vacc. gets me going as you know, but the "HIV doesn't
      > > cause AIDS" stuff is as close as I come to calling something
      > demonic.
      > > She once provided a link to one of those web sites with the
      > > suggestion we check them out, I forget what it was in reference to,
      > > it was not her central point, but it apparently did not bother her
      > > that that kind of malicious homicidal idiocy was being promoted."
      > >
      > >
      > >[Keith:] Well, the HIV/AIDS subject is complex. I've found a number
      > of links
      > > both for and against the HIV/AIDS correlation, debated in both cases
      > > by scientists/medical professionals.
      >
      > And the stakes are huge - making the wrong call on HIV/AIDS has
      > repurcussions.
      >
      > What Diana doesn't seem to *get* is that neither Deborah, nor a merry
      > band of witch doctors, astrologers, anthroposophical "anti-
      > scientists", and over-pampered New Agers are initiating the debates--
      > the *traditional* scientists are, award winning scientists who were
      > highly respected in their fields until they *ventured off the
      > reservation* with their AIDS/HIV theories. Her rebuttal to these
      > scientific arguments reads like a page taken from the 16th century's
      > religious inquisition. Shreaking at others as if they're pagan
      > heretics, accusing them of murder and demon possession, demanding
      > they affirm or denounce words she puts in their mouths, as
      > in: "[scientists are] not really interested in preventing disease,
      > but actually in causing it, perhaps even in smiting massive
      > populations", as she did to Deborah--it's Witch-hunting 101 that
      > Diana understands so well, and definitely *NOT* the science.
      >
      >
      > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_reappraisal#History_of_the_AIDS_Reap
      > praisal_movement
      >
      >
      > While Diana conducts her heresy and apostasy trials, you provided
      > links which help inform us all to scientific debates within the
      > AIDS/HIV disputes. Thanks, Keith. It's interesting to note the
      > quality of debate displayed by the NIH and others holding
      > the "normative" view. They managed to engage in the debate WITHOUT
      > the witch-hunting techniques Diana has resorted to.
      >
      > Since science is said to be different than belief and dogma, it is
      > odd to find so many of its most fanatic supporters defending it from
      > that very standpoint.
      >
      > Linda
    • Mike helsher
      ... an ... travels ... was ... Three cheers for Barnabus Collins!!! Mike
      Message 33 of 33 , May 8 9:39 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        > Some years ago, I was watching a TV series that was supposed to be
        an
        > occult soap opera, blending vampires and reincarnations and time
        travels
        > and witchery and so forth. Pewrhaps the reason why the series folded
        was
        > that there were too many comic book ingredients in the same stew.
        >
        >
        > Tarjei
        > http://uncletaz.com/

        Three cheers for Barnabus Collins!!!

        Mike
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.