Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Soulja

AIDS man made?

Recommended Posts

...but top marks for actually finding some stuff to refer to - most people just put up random links or use the "Zarkovian Dash" technique.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya, Thanks Soulja.

You put a lot of work into it. Gotta think on it.

Just aman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm, its kind of hard to think of it not people human made. if a virus like this had stayed dormant for so many years (apprently the first reported case was in the 70's, so thats like 1900 years) what stops other, more powerful virus from popping up when ever they want to in the future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by chris

if a virus like this had stayed dormant for so many years (apprently the first reported case was in the 70's, so thats like 1900 years) what stops other, more powerful virus from popping up when ever they want to in the future?

What?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, for the ammount of people that HIV effects, its kind of hard to believe that no cases were reported in the 1500's or something. (thats what i meant by 1900 years or whatever) i was trying to say there were like no reported cases until the 70's. and if it just started poping up in the 70's. and it was a natural virus (non man made (duh)) what would make other virus's that layed dormant for so many years from just popping up. i mean they know syphalius has been around for hundreds of years, so why not HIV?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah I see what you mean.

 

New viruses do pop up all the time. They just aren't all as bad as HIV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And just because the virus wasn't found until then doesn't mean there were no cases; especially since HIV itself doesn't kill you, it just destroys your immune system to make way for various other diseases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to an earlier thread being deleted, I now get to say this for the second time...

 

\o/ 1000th pseudoscience post! Yay! \o/

 

Hehehehe.

 

:spam:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...because things that look the same with a shitty low-resolution electron micrograph really have the same DNA. I don't even see a phto of HIV on that page, the arrow thqt points to "HIV" contradicts the fact that the caption says HTLV-III. And actually, if you read the caption you'd find out those photos are a sequence of the same virus. The photos on the top don't show HIV either. That person is a cretinous ignoramus, and I can't wait till the day HIV kills his sorry ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by fafalone
Hence the 'hmmmm'.

 

I like the way he talks about this Boyd Graves person, and it's on BoydGraves.com.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a lot of documentation too. It's on toilet paper and is worth the same as what I've seen. I agree with Fafalone on the grainy pictures which show round shapes. Could be a cross section of some plant. Where's the analytical data. I think it's just a bunch of crap.

Just aman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.boydgraves.com/news/112802.html'>http://www.boydgraves.com/news/112802.html

 

U.S. FORCED TO ALLOW LAWSUIT ON 'LAB BIRTH OF AIDS'

 

Washington, DC - In a November 20, 2002 letter from the Office of the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, AIDS ORIGIN researcher, Boyd E. Graves, J.D. has been given sixty days to file suit in the U.S. federal court of his choosing.

 

"The people have forced the right to sue the United States over their "creation", "production" and "proliferation" of HIV/AIDS through the secret, federal virus development program, the U.S. Special (AIDS) Virus program (1948 - 1978)." said Graves.

 

 

"The yearly progress reports of the secret program provide the irrefutable narrative proof of the linkage of experiment to the flowchart, "research logic" of the African Holocaust. This best explains how Black people account for 13% of the population and 50% of all new AIDS cases."

 

Graves, a civil rights lawyer and decorated US Navy veteran, filed a similar complaint with Ohio's federal courts in 1998. After his 33 month legal battle and an appeal to the US Supreme Court in 2001, Graves' lawsuit finally prompted Congress to request an investigation into the missing appropriations of the secret federal virus development program Special Virus through the US General Accounting Office.

 

The US government's official report was made public following the terrorist attacks of September 11th and was highly criticized as a 'total white-wash' by many independent investigators, including Professor Robert Lee and Harvard's Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz.

 

Graves and his supporters say they are confident the evidence of the laboratory birth of AIDS is irrefutable.

 

"We can show through the progress reports of the secret program, that the original name of HIV was ESP-1 virus, developed in accordance with the phases of the flowchart." Graves said. "The United States purposefully and intentionally, complemented the "small pox" vaccine that went to Africa and the "Hepatitis B" vaccine that was given to homosexuals that the United States recruited for that purpose."

 

Graves said he is hopeful people support his efforts by downloading the 1971 flow chart document from his website http://www.boydgraves.com and by writing to elected and appointed health officials.

 

"We have found the well-spring of the genesis of AIDS," said Graves. "It is our nation state, it is us."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't even see a phto of HIV on that page, the arrow thqt points to "HIV" contradicts the fact that the caption says HTLV-III. And actually, if you read the caption you'd find out those photos are a sequence of the same virus.

 

Eh, lol. HTLV-III was an early name for HIV. An uh, yea, they're supposed to be a sequence. Except the bottom photo is different from the top two photos, which were taken 10 years earlier of a man-made virus.

 

The Nature New Biology Reference is

 

Nature New Biology 1971;232:140-142

 

Gallo RC, Sarin PS, Allen PT, Newton WA Priori ES, Bowen JM and Dmochowski L. Reverse transcriptase in type C virus particles of human origin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an interesting transcript of a DOD hearing in 1969.

 

 

 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1970

 

 

 

United States Senate Library

 

 

 

HEARINGS before a SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON

 

APPROPRIATIONS

 

 

 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 

 

 

Ninety-First Congress

 

 

 

First Session

 

 

 

Subcommittee on Department of Defense

 

 

 

George H. Mahon, Texas, Chairman

 

Robert L.F. Sikes, Florida, Glenard P. Lipscomb, California

 

Jamie D. Whitten, Mississippi William E. Minshall, Ohio

 

George W. Andrews, Alabama, John J. Rhodes, Arizona

 

Daniel J. Flood, Pennsylvania Glenn R. Davis, Wisconsin

 

John M. Slack, West Virginia, Joseph P. Addabbo, New York

 

Frank E. Evans, Colorado

 

 

 

Temporarily assigned H.B. 15090

 

 

 

PART 5

 

 

 

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

 

 

 

Department of the Army

 

 

 

Statement of Director, Advanced Research Project Agency

 

Statement of Director, Defense Research and Engineering

 

__________

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

 

 

 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

 

WASHINGTON : 1969

 

UNITED STATES SENATE LIBRARY

 

 

 

129

 

 

 

TUESDAY, JULY 1, 1969

 

 

 

SYNTHETIC BIOLOGICAL AGENTS

 

 

 

There are two things about the biological agent field I would like to mention. One is the possibility of technological surprise. Molecular biology is a field that is advancing very rapidly and eminent biologists believe that within a period of 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.

 

 

 

MR. SIKES. Are we doing any work in that field?

 

 

 

DR. MACARTHUR. We are not.

 

 

 

MR. SIKES. Why not? Lack of money or lack of interest?

 

 

 

DR. MACARTHUR. Certainly not lack of interest.

 

 

 

MR. SIKES. Would you provide for our records information on what would be required, what the advantages of such a program would be. The time and the cost involved?

 

 

 

DR. MACARTHUR. We will be very happy to. The information follows:

 

 

 

The dramatic progress being made in the field of molecular biology led us to investigate the relevance of this field of science to biological warfare. A small group of experts considered this matter and provided the following observations:

 

 

 

1. All biological agents up to the present time are representatives of naturally occurring disease, and are thus known by scientists throughout the world. They are easily available to qualified scientists for research, either for offensive or defensive purposes.

 

 

 

2. Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon when we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.

 

 

 

3. A research program to explore the feasibility of this could be completed in approximately 5 years at a total cost of $10 million.

 

 

 

4. It would be very difficult to establish such a program. Molecular biology is a relatively new science. There are not many highly competent scientists in the field., almost all are in university laboratories, and they are generally adequately supported from sources other than DOD. However, it was considered possible to initiate an adequate program through the National Academy of sciences - National Research Council (NAS-NRC, and tentative plans were made to initiate the program. However decreasing funds in CB, growing criticism of the CB program, and our reluctance to involve the NAS NRC in such a controversial endeavor have led us to postpone it for the past 2 years.

 

 

 

It is a highly controversial issue and there are many who believe such research should not be undertaken lest it lead to yet another method of massive killing of large populations. On the other hand, without the sure scientific knowledge that such a weapon is possible, and an understanding of the ways it could be done. there is little that can be done to devise defensive measures. Should an enemy develop it there is little doubt that this is an important area of potential military technological inferiority in which there is no adequate research program."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That person is a cretinous ignoramus, and I can't wait till the day HIV kills his sorry ass

 

Stop being so quick to pass judgement.

 

Could be a cross section of some plant. Where's the analytical data. I think it's just a bunch of crap.

 

Basically he's showing the similarities of the AIDS virus and a synthetic virus called "C-Virus". He provides journal references, in case you doubt what you're seeing. But you're right, because they look the same doesn't mean they are the same.

 

It is an interesting thought though.

 

This is very interesting, especially all of the immunological research being conducted by the department of defense around that time.

 

Check out http://www.bhc.edu/eastcampus/leeb/aids/biow8.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Dragoon:

And if they were even trying to whipe out a whole group of people and this virus isnt controllable there is still the chance that it can spread to anyone and then their entire plan would backfire and possibly whipe out the whole entire population over time.

People aren't that stupid...if AIDS was created by humans, then they would have the antidote. You have to look at this on a species lifespan, not from your lifespan. Why introduce the antidote when the objective is not complete? To make such a huge change as wiping out a certain type of people, you must sacrifice things. If they were clever enough to engineer AIDS they would realize that subjecting most of the human population could be a possibility or the only way to "exterminate" a type of people.

 

Just thinking "out of the box."

 

I don't think it could be engineered though. If it was, then everything you know about the way governments operate and even your entire life does not come close to resembling what you think you know....sounds like the Matrix but without computers. It's too sci-fi for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, feel like some more rumor and speculation?

 

According to my Bio teacher from last year (who, by the way, is something of an idiot, not a bad person, but a horrible teacher)...

 

The first real spread of the HIV virus to the North American continent occurred in the early 80s... Apparently a flight attendant(male) from an airline that flew to Africa was infected and decided he'd bring as many people down with him as he could... so he flew back and forth between California and New York, and had as many wild sex parties as he could on each end (and yes, that is exactly what my teacher said to her 9th grade class... shows her intelligence level) and spread the virus to as many people as possible.

 

Just what Wilson told me... no idea if it's true or not. Anyone have info on that?

 

As for the antidote... If you want to keep to the conspiracy theory, wouldn't the groups putting out the virus keep the antidote a secret, and only administer it to the people they wanted to keep around? Or, would they sell it on the black market?

 

TOTAL speculation right there, honestly, I don't believe there's a conspiracy theory at all... Back to Faf's point at the beginning, it's like saying President Bush organized 9/11.

 

And isn't today National AIDS Awareness Day?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.