On 23 Sep 1998 johnburgin at worldnet.att.net wrote:
> he's been busy writing a book, which you should buy and read. He is
> passionately against what you proclaim to be "good science". Not all
> scientists are bad, just the ones that aren't objective, which
> obviously, you are not. Have you ever heard of Emerson's quote, and I
> paraphrase, brilliance is the ability to hold to conflicting views on
> a subject and still be able to maintain objectivity. Something like
> that. I used to be where you are, swallowing all the garbage the
> government was spewing. So, I guess I sort of feel sorry for you.
> But there will be a time when you will be confronted with evidence
> that you can't deny or dismiss. One day you will meet someone that
> has been HIV + for 20 years with no evidence of AIDS and no history of
> taking drugs like AZT and PI's. I hope that one day is no more than 7
> years away. Obviously that's the 20 year mark for the test labelling
> people as being HIV + having been developed.
there are long-term non-progresors infected for a long time. and there are
99 years old heavy smokers. will you deny smoking is unhealthy ? what does
that mean for your argument ?