Disarming the Struggle AgaiAIDS: Anti-Science Obscurantism, Conpsiracy Theories

[Justin Schwartz]

A final note on this. I accept the standard theory on faith, because it is,a 
s you say, the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community. That is 
the normal basis most educated people have for accepting scientific matters 
in which they arew not qualified. I am not qualified to appraise 
epediomological studies and so would nor benefit much from them if I did 
read them, nor would my opinion of their merit be worth anything. As to the 
legal admissibility of dissident studies, I am not sure what you mean "power 
works that way." Are you suggesting that the courts operate on purely 
political criteria of scientific worth? This is not true. If you are 
interested, I will try to explain Daubert and Fed. R. Evid. 702. --jks


> > You agree that the overwhelming weight of scientific opinion is that 
>AIDS is
> > caused by HIV.
>
>yes...
>
>Why is it then inappropriate to treat skepticism as
> > flat-earthism?
>
>because scientific consensus itself is not necassarily indicative of 
>scientific proof. relations of power being what they are, one should always 
>double and triple check what is alleged to be a scientific consensus and 
>scientific proof. shouln't we all know this by now?
>
>You say that some respectable types doubt that HIV could do
> > everything that it's claimed, but even if that is so,
>
>and it is. again, you should read for yourself.
>
>that doesn't warrant
> > skepticism about the basic claim.
>
>not in and of itself, no, but i would never have based my opinion on the 
>"skeptesicm" of expert opinon alone. both powerful anecdotal evidence and 
>lab work have, in my opinon, exposed the weakness of the standard theory. 
>indeed, it seems to me that in fact most folk have accepted the standard 
>theory on faith.
>
>I am not, as I say, a physician or any
> > kind of medical expert,
>
>ok...
>
>  just a lawyer, but under legal standards, given the
> > current state of knowledge, no one who doubted the standard view could 
>be a
> > real expert whose testimony was reliable.
>
>probobly not. power works that way.
>

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com