Automoderated users, edit
1,887
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 29:
Line 29: + + +
Talk:Scientific controversy over the cause of AIDS (view source)
Revision as of 22:32, January 7, 2009
, 22:32, January 7, 2009→Jumping off point
:::::::::Einstein took a few physics courses. Einstein published some papers, which was well reviewed by some with Ph.D.'s (it was also controversial and has had many Ph.D's who have written negative things about it). Bauer took a few chemistry courses. Bauer published a book, which has been well reviewed by other Ph.D's. Don't see the difference in qualifications or process. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 15:17, 7 January 2009 (EST)
:::::::::Einstein took a few physics courses. Einstein published some papers, which was well reviewed by some with Ph.D.'s (it was also controversial and has had many Ph.D's who have written negative things about it). Bauer took a few chemistry courses. Bauer published a book, which has been well reviewed by other Ph.D's. Don't see the difference in qualifications or process. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 15:17, 7 January 2009 (EST)
(unindent)'''Still''' haven't answered my question. Einstein "took a few physics courses" and published a paper ''dealing with'' physics theory. Bauer "took a few chemistry courses" and published a book dealing with microbiology, virology, and pathology. There's the difference in processes. If more research is performed into Bauer's (and others') theory, he could very well be comparable to Einstein. At the moment, though, the available evidence '''overwhelmingly''' supports an HIV->AIDS model. [[User:JLauttamus|Jeffrey W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|<sub>Discussion</sub>]] 16:04, 7 January 2009 (EST)
(unindent)'''Still''' haven't answered my question. Einstein "took a few physics courses" and published a paper ''dealing with'' physics theory. Bauer "took a few chemistry courses" and published a book dealing with microbiology, virology, and pathology. There's the difference in processes. If more research is performed into Bauer's (and others') theory, he could very well be comparable to Einstein. At the moment, though, the available evidence '''overwhelmingly''' supports an HIV->AIDS model. [[User:JLauttamus|Jeffrey W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|<sub>Discussion</sub>]] 16:04, 7 January 2009 (EST)
:::::::::::I believe I've answered your question in the course of our interactions. Maybe it's my worldview? I believe that we have different worldviews and I think that this fact is going to cause us to not always understand where the other is coming from. ''My Worldview:'' I think there are lots and lots of good things to be found in the "religious/academic ghetto" (lots and lots of bad things too). Einstein when he published his papers in 1905 was definitely in an academic ghetto (religious ghetto is debatable). I mean this in a metaphorical sense. Einstein didn't physically live in a ghetto (he had a good job and good friends...though like Einstein, his friends were often on the fringe of the Academy). Bauer isn't really even in an academic ghetto, since he has held respectable positions within Academia, which Einstein in 1905 had not. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 17:32, 7 January 2009 (EST)
:::::::::::::At any rate, on the other hand, Bauer's book holds that there is plenty of available evidence that '''overwhelmingly''' debunks an HIV->AIDS model. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 17:32, 7 January 2009 (EST)
:RickD, Bauer did not just take a few chemistry courses, he is a chemist (BTW, books (non-textbooks) are not often peer-reviewed). What the issue is that sometimes you have to have a level of knowledge that is not simply deducible by common sense. For example, if you have never had a course on how the immune system works, how would you explain the difference between a viral infection and a bacterial infection? The topics I listed above have everything to do with understanding pathology, the mechanisms of infection, the understanding of modes of pathogenesis in the body, ect. Without an understanding you can only provide generalizations, which are not useful in treatment and preventive medicine, gasoline will destroy HIV so we should inject ourselves with gas to rid ourselves of HIV... see what I mean about generalizing? A more credible source would come from a medical doctor who works in the field, not a psychiatrist for example. None the less, this is not really a problem since debunking the cause of AIDS is quiet easy.--[[User:Able806|Able806]] 16:12, 7 January 2009 (EST)
:RickD, Bauer did not just take a few chemistry courses, he is a chemist (BTW, books (non-textbooks) are not often peer-reviewed). What the issue is that sometimes you have to have a level of knowledge that is not simply deducible by common sense. For example, if you have never had a course on how the immune system works, how would you explain the difference between a viral infection and a bacterial infection? The topics I listed above have everything to do with understanding pathology, the mechanisms of infection, the understanding of modes of pathogenesis in the body, ect. Without an understanding you can only provide generalizations, which are not useful in treatment and preventive medicine, gasoline will destroy HIV so we should inject ourselves with gas to rid ourselves of HIV... see what I mean about generalizing? A more credible source would come from a medical doctor who works in the field, not a psychiatrist for example. None the less, this is not really a problem since debunking the cause of AIDS is quiet easy.--[[User:Able806|Able806]] 16:12, 7 January 2009 (EST)