By-Tor.com

Kenyan ecologist Wangari Maathai, the first African woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize, today (October 9, 2004) reiterated her claim that the AIDS virus was a deliberately created biological agent.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/20 ... 216687.htm

What do you guys think?

It was always my understanding that it was spread to humans via the consumption of infected primates. How the primates got it, I have no idea.

It it generally believed to have come from a primate, probably a chimp. But as we all know, transmission of HIV is not always by sexual intercourse, so there's no need to infer bestiality. As by-tor says, it could have been by eating (undercooked) meat, or a person could've been bitten by the primate.


Chimps have their own immunodeficiency virus, from which HIV is descended.

I don't subscribe to the 'biological agent' theory. I mean, I'm sure this person has done waaaaay more research than me, but HIV as a biological weapon isn't logical. I can understand how this theory comes to light, as it's largely considered that HIV came from primates, and we humans often use primates for medical research, but it still doesn't make any sense. And while I don't put it past governments of the world to do this type of research, HIV as a biological weapon doesn't make sense. A biological weapon would be designed to kill or imobilize quickly, and HIV doesn't do either quickly (if it does it at all). Also, a biological weapon would be designed to spread easily; another think HIV doesn't do. For HIV to have been developed as this, it would have been one of the largest failures in science, as none of the goals were reached.

Of course, that doesn't mean it didn't start out as weapon research, but my beliefs make me think that the 'eggheads' of the world would have done better than this. If they're going to create a bio-weapon, it would make more sense to beef up the flu virius, as it already posses one of the properties of a good biological weapon...easily spread.

Those who share the thoughts of Wangari Maathai will tell you that it makes a great biological agent because western scientists designed it to get rid of segments of the popluation which are nothing but a drain. It's wiping out uneducated tribal areas of Africa, and as all elitists know, Africa would be better off without them. On this side of the pond it's hitting basically two groups of people; homosexuals and junkies who share needles. And of course, the elitists here are better off without them as well.

In that article, Wangari Maathai dismisses the monkey claim by stating that we've coexisted with monkeys forever so it couldn't be that.

A different sort of conspiracy theorist will tell you that the monkey thing makes no sense because it doesn't appear to have originated in one place. Rather, it sprung up in several locations simultaneously. And in all of those locations we find the World Health Organization conducting research... research that involved them giving injections.

I personally have no idea whether that's true or not, but there are published authors out there making the claim.

In fact, I make no claim to know anything about it at all. I just saw the headline and wondered what you guys thought.

It's always easy to point the finger at a government.

Those who share the thoughts of Wangari Maathai will tell you that it makes a great biological agent because western scientists designed it to get rid of segments of the popluation which are nothing but a drain. It's wiping out uneducated tribal areas of Africa, and as all elitists know, Africa would be better off without them. On this side of the pond it's hitting basically two groups of people; homosexuals and junkies who share needles. And of course, the elitists here are better off without them as well.

If they told me that, I would promptly respond with, "You're a freaking idiot!"

I don't see how it's designed to get rid of certain segments, when the disease doesn't discriminate. And if those certain segments of the population were a drain before HIV, they're even moreso now with all the medical aide that has to pour in there. Any way I look at, as a biological weapon, HIV sucks.

I've had to vote 'other' as its the best option I can find among those given.

As has been pointed out, the 'bestiality' theory doesn't really hold water due to the multiple ways in which the virus can be contracted. Similarly, the amount of time in which humanity has co-existed with Simian life forms is also an argument against.

I can't believe that its a punishment from god as, simply, I don'tbelieve in god. That sort of argument, I'm afraid, is the sort of thing that is spouted by religous hysterics who want to foist their own sense of morality upon the rest of us. If it is from god, how do they explain the number of children who contract it from tainted blood transfusions.

As for the created biological agent - that belongs in the same place as the faked moon landings, Elvis is alive, Pope John Paul I was murdered, crop circlesand any other crackpot conspiracy theory you want to pull from out of the gutter.

One thought I will offer (not as a theory as I don't know enough to form theories, its just a notion that struck me) is that AIDS struck after science began to find more effective treatments for cancer. Cancer took an upturn after smallpox was eradicated. Maybe its nature's way of telling us that the population is too large. I don't know.

Slaine mac Roth wrote:Maybe its nature's way of telling us that the population is too large. I don't know.

I'll offer up France to make nature happy.

by-tor wrote:

Slaine mac Roth wrote:Maybe its nature's way of telling us that the population is too large. I don't know.

I'll offer up France to make nature happy.

Here, here

by-tor wrote: If they told me that, I would promptly respond with, "You're a freaking idiot!"

That describes my view on a lot of recent Nobel Peace Prize winners.

ElfDude wrote:On this side of the pond it's hitting basically two groups of people; homosexuals

*shivers* let's not go into detail.

carolynn

We've always co-existed with primates. We've only co-existed with primates in a polluted world recently.

So, uh, yeah. I'm down with the nothings changed line. Like you said, if you want to believe it, you will.


There is no over-bearing force striking cancer upon people because we're over-populated. As far as transmitted diseases go, they're here to stay until they're eradicated through scientific methods.

Slaine mac Roth wrote:As for the created biological agent - that belongs in the same place as the faked moon landings, Elvis is alive, Pope John Paul I was murdered, crop circlesand any other crackpot conspiracy theory you want to pull from out of the gutter.

Oh, by the way... leave Elvis outta this!!!

[quote="ElfDude
Oh, by the way... leave Elvis outta this!!! [/quote]

When I saw him in Nottingham the other day, he told me to say 'Thang you very much.'

by-tor wrote:

Slaine mac Roth wrote:Maybe its nature's way of telling us that the population is too large. I don't know.

I'll offer up France to make nature happy.

I'm amazed you never said Scotland!!!