Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / October 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Differentiation and the Grand Unifying Theory vs. "HIV"

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
pauleewhiting - 20 Oct 2005 21:04 GMT
There is one, very basic problem with the HIV theory of AIDS:
differentiation.

Ya see, "HIV" is supposed to be this brand-spanking new virus, but when
"HIV" mutated, it *didn't* differentiate.  In other words, it didn't do
anything *new.*

And I would offer to anyone out there listening that this one, simple
concept blows the HIV theory of AIDS right out of the water.

For, all of evolution in nature (i.e., all natural mutation) leads to
*differentiation.*

Except, of course, "HIV."

It de-differentiated when it mutated.  In other words, it didn't do
anything new and different than had already been done!  It just mimicked
what other viruses were doing.

And I would also offer that the reason for this highly-illogical model
is because the HIV theory was *created* by conformist thinkers: those
who can only mimick what others are doing.

In the whole of the universe *differentiation* is the name of the game!

Without it, there can be no change in the environment nor any adapting
to the new environment.

Without change, there can be no growth.

And I would offer to anyone out there listening, that this one, simple
concept maybe central to the Grand Unifying Theory.

The problem lies in the thinking of many scientists: they are conformist
thinkers.

And the conformist thinkers are the ones who control the purse strings.

Everyone knows this!

The conformist thinkers are the ones who design and implement the ideas
thought of by innovative thinkers.

There is nothing wrong with that, of course!  It's how new concepts and
ideas get implimented.

The problem lies with the conformists being afraid of - you guessed it!
- CHANGE.

And "Poof!" the circle is complete.

Now I just need to learn every aspect of science so I can support my
hypothesis!

Paul Whiting

?There is overwhelming scientific consensus that HIV causes AIDS.?

? Dr. Jeffrey P. Koplan, Director, US Centers for Disease Control (CDC)
montygram - 24 Oct 2005 23:45 GMT
When some told Duesberg to be infected by the virus to show that it was
not dangerous, they did not say how they would isolate the virus.  I am
asking, exactly how do you isolate "pure virus" to infect those of us
who want to take the "Duesberg challenge," as I do (my version)?

They don't realize how badly they discredited themselves when they said
this to Duesberg, because anyone with a bit of scientific knowledge
will then ask the question, how do you get the "virus" from person A to
person B?  To date, it's all based upon layers of assumptions that make
no sense or have no scientific evidence to support them.

Rate this thread:






 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.