archive.is webpage capture | からアーカイブ | 2014年1月13日 22:59:03 UTC | |
| すべてのスクリーンショット, | ドメインから tomwoods.com | ||
| ウェブページスクリーンショット | |||
 short link long link html code wiki code | |||
ABOUT TOM WOODS
Thomas E. Woods, Jr., is the
New York Times
bestselling author of 11 books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History
and Meltdown
(on the financial crisis). A senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Woods has appeared on MSNBC, CNBC, FOX News, FOX Business, C-SPAN, Bloomberg Television, and hundreds of radio programs... (Read More)
SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone.
SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone.
Find us on Facebook
You and 53,182 others like
Thomas E. Woods Jr.53,182 people like
Thomas E. Woods Jr.
-
If any of you sound people can help with this recording issue, I will be your best friend http://tomwoods.com/blog/another-puzzle-for-you-sound-people/#.UtRU1EiAODY.twitter …
-
Right now at http://www.TomWoodsRadio.com : @DanielLMcAdams of the @RonPaulInstitut on Fallujah, Iran sacntions, and more #tlot
-
@SHEADYguy Temp prob with the redirect. Direct link is http://www.libertyclassroom.com/objections
-
Longtime Levin listener and supporter banned from Levin FB for mentioning me tells me what happened http://tomwoods.com/blog/a-final-note-on-mark-levin/#.UtK-msCTwYQ.twitter … #tlot #tcot
-
I now suspect every traffic jam is intentionally inflicted for political revenge.
Retweeted by Thomas Woods -
Listening @ThomasEWoods 'Politically Incorrect History of the US' on #audiible. Love the contradictory perspective it has on our history.
Retweeted by Thomas Woods -
@Bobby_Beatz @RonPaulInstitut Monday's program is with exactly that guest on exactly that topic. Are you pulling my leg?
-
@NY2DC_N_BACK You are joking. I NEVER talk about Levin. Ever. Except when I am attacked. You just made this up.
-
The Tom Woods Show -- Jury Nullification: What It Is, and How to Use It http://tomwoods.com/blog/jury-nullification-what-it-is-and-how-to-use-it/#.UtGC59baq-Y.twitter … #tlot @FlexYourRights
-
@NY2DC_N_BACK Right, all Levin did was call Judge Napolitano fringe and a kook. That's much better.
-
@NY2DC_N_BACK So you don't like Walter Williams or Judge Napolitano either? You sure have to excommunicate a lot of people to be a Levin fan
-
@NY2DC_N_BACK Levin Maddow wouldn't be obsessed with us if we were three people.
-
@NY2DC_N_BACK Unlike the neocons, we don't crave mainstream respectability. We are OK with being a minority by standing on principle.
-
@cmea166 @1lawatchman @MilkMushMeat @marklevinshow @TheKingDude Ask Levin to stop calling Judge Napolitano a kook. Levin started whole thing
-
@NY2DC_N_BACK And yet somehow we have made nullification a national issue with both Levin and his pal Maddow against us! You're funny.
-
@NY2DC_N_BACK Btw, why are you so vicious toward a complete stranger? Life's too short, man. Lighten up on the hate.
-
@NY2DC_N_BACK About three people are messing with Amazon reviews, and I asked them not to. Levin listeners have done the same thing.
-
@FlexYourRights We can trace the decline of American society by the topics we need to cover in FAQs. Thanks for being on the show.
-
Today at noon ET at http://www.TomWoodsRadio.com : Steve Silverman of @FlexYourRights joins me to talk jury nullification! #tlot
There are no more Tweets in this stream.
The Tom Woods App
‘Skeptical Libertarians’ Are Not Really Skeptical
19th July 2012There’s a group of people on Facebook calling themselves “skeptical libertarians.” What enrages them most, it seems, are people who question the official version of events (in other words, they are most annoyed by actual skeptics) or who think the pharmaceutical-industrial complex might not in fact be an infallible priesthood. You’d think these would be views that would resonate with, you know, skeptics.
We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our
troubleshooting guide.
Disqus helps you find new and interesting content, discussions and products. Some sponsors and ecommerce sites may pay us for these recommendations and links. Learn more
or
give us feedback.
Around The Web
Also on Tom Woods | The official website for author Tom Woods
Be the first to comment.
Jonathan Swaringen see moreI think there is a balance. Some of the things that get a hearing are pretty stupid. I am not a biochemist but when I hear statements like "94% of prozac is flouride" I look them up, and it's obviously false no matter how you look at it. But even if it were true, that's not how chemistry works. Sodium Chloride has chlorine, yet it's obviously a necessary chemical in our body, and yet some people out there seem to refer to elements or compounds that are within other compounds as though they are an automatic negative because they are poisonous are detrimental by themselves.The people who defend the positions on these subjects are also extraordinarily defensive when I've seen the arguments between them and others. They practically accuse you of supporting the status quo.I don't believe you are doing this Tom, but I think it's best not to choose sides on this debate. It's absolutely appropriate to question both official tales of events as well as the science of those tied closely to the state or actively seeking state intervention, but "questioning" does not equate to refuting. Engaging in pseudo-science isn't a way to convince people either. It contributes to the view that libertarians are anti-science, which isn't accurate. We have good reasons why we don't believe in empirical methodology for social sciences, but these reasons will get less of a hearing if we seem to reject it even when it's used appropriately.Allen Murdoch see moreso, i'm one of the aforementioned Skeptical Libertarians, and i'd love to have a friendly, polite, sane, reasonable discussion with any of Dr. Woods' fans about who we are and what we are trying to do.Bill Jones see moreGiven that "conspiracy" is an agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal act and given that Washington DC is packed with criminals who work in gangs, What sort of moron doesn't believe that the world is full of conspiracies?Hilary's attempt at identify theft at the UN?
Barry the Bombers murder by PowerPoint?
Holder's gun smuggling?It's harder to find policies that are not the result of conspiracies.edward see moreI wish you would have posted some examples of their "skepticism" so I wouldn't have to hunt them down on FB. Then I might have a better idea of your objection. Just a little constructive criticism.George Geankoplis see moreDr. Woods, would you care to share some specific issue on which you think “the Skeptical Libertarians” are wrong? Is there an issue on which you think some of the less mainstream scientific ideas are closer to the truth?vox see moreBeing a libertarian almost requires rethinking nearly everything that you were taught throughout the course of your life. This is why most people seem unwilling to embrace libertarianism. If history is the "queen" of the social sciences, it provides so much of the information on why we are in a particular present state. Reading, say, Antony Sutton's books are a very sobering and possibly stressful experience. Careful study and contemplation can overturn what you see around you as normal, everyday life that people continue to believe in.
People are trained to be "tolerant" of everything, to eschew the fact that there is objective truth, like morals, that do not change with time and technology. Murray Rothbard has stated this. The lines between good and bad have been blurred for hundreds of millions of people. For most people, their lives are everything, and the idea of real sacrifice toward self-improvement is an alien idea. They think of money and "happiness." It makes no difference to so many, whether their life is productive, or they dig ditches and fill them back in. Entertainment and going with the flow is everything. Their ideas of achievement are present satisfaction, having planted nearly all roots in a material existence. Of course, the material is very good. But it cannot be the prime mover for human life.Charles A. Burris see more"Taking the State
wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to
differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators, and beneficiaries
from those of a professional-criminal class."~ Albert Jay Nock, Our Enemy, The StateAn understanding of Libertarian Class Analysis is the
"litmus test" separating real libertarians from alternative lifestyle
dilettantes dabbling in free market theory. Sometimes labeled "power elite
analysis" or "Establishment studies," this examination of causal
relationships regarding the nature and scope of political power, who has it and
how it is exercised, is crucial to understanding the nexus between the State
and its criminal activities. It is very similar to what researcher Peter Dale
Scott calls "Deep Politics," the critical examination of the sub-rosa
reality behind surface events, an attempt to unmask the true face of power,
exposing the elite social, economic, and financial groups and individuals who
benefit from the exercise of State coercion.
These so-called "skeptical libertarians" are the ones out of the historic mainstream of libertarianism stretching back to the Levelers and the 17th Century Commonwealthmen; the English "Country Party" tradition of John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon; the American revolutionaries such as Thomas Jefferson, Tom Paine, George Washington, and Sam Adams; the anti-Federalists; the Jeffersonian Republicans and the "Tertium Quid; anti-Central Bank libertarians such as Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, William Leggett and Thomas Hart Benton; Josiah Warren; Lysander Spooner; Benjamin Tucker; Franz Oppenheimer; Albert Jay Nock; Frank Chodorov; Murray N. Rothbard; Lew Rockwell; and Thomas Woods.Puzzled > Charles A. Burris see moreAndrew Jackson the libertarian. Interesting claim. Care to back it up?
Anon see moreIf cynicism towards the Natural News and 9/11 truther crowd falls under the category "Skeptical Libertarian" then I'm most definitely that. Far too long has the conspiracy association been a black-eye for libertarians.AE Hall > Anon see moreIt was the causal realist approach to economics that opened my eyes to causality as apodictic. When you take a causal approach and extend effects beyond steps one two three four five and so on, you begin to see the chaos of reality itself, let alone human existence, and can easily see why conspiracy theories are easily products of pure conjecture.
James Redford see moreOn the matter of the intensive conditioning of the public by government to recoil from conspiracy charges which inculpate it (while at the same time accepting the mendacious, anti-veridical and self-serving conspiracy theories the government promulgates), the following passage by Prof. Murray N. Rothbard is quite edifying:""
It is also important for the State to inculcate in its subjects an aversion to any "conspiracy theory of history"; for a search for "conspiracies" means a search for motives and an attribution of responsibility for historical misdeeds. If, however, any tyranny imposed by the State, or venality, or aggressive war, was caused not by the State rulers but by mysterious and arcane "social forces," or by the imperfect state of the world or, if in some way, everyone was responsible ("We Are All Murderers," proclaims one slogan), then there is no point to the people becoming indignant or rising up against such misdeeds. Furthermore, an attack on "conspiracy theories" means that the subjects will become more gullible in believing the "general welfare" reasons that are always put forth by the State for engaging in any of its despotic actions. A "conspiracy theory" can unsettle the system by causing the public to doubt the State's ideological propaganda.
""(From Prof. Murray N. Rothbard, "The Anatomy of the State", Rampart Journal of Individualist Thought, Summer 1965, pp. 1-24. Reprinted in a collection of some of Rothbard's articles, Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature and Other Essays [Washington, D.C.: Libertarian Review Press, 1974].)The inherent, unchangeable nature of government is colossal conspiracy. Recall that a conspiracy is simply when two or more people take part in a plan which involves doing something improper to others (of which plan may or may not be kept secret, i.e., secrecy is not a necessary component for actions to be a conspiracy). The mere fact that governments set for themselves legal double-standards is alone quite enough to logically demonstrate that governments themselves consider their own actions improper (i.e., if their same actions which they do to others are done to them they regard it as a crime). Thus, the conclusion that government itself is the largest conspiracy to ever exist or that could ever exist is logically unavoidable.For extensive documentation on the globalist oligarchy and their self-termed New World Order world government and world religion followed by comprehensive population reduction for the masses and immortality through technology (i.e., transhumanism) for the elite (their "end game"), see Sec. 8.2: "Ponerology Vis-à-Vis Politics" of my following article:James Redford, "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", Social Science Research Network (SSRN), April 9, 2012 (orig. pub. December 19, 2011), 185 pp., doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, http://archive.org/details/The... .Stephan Kinsella > James Redford see moreRedford is the Insane One who claims: "Born in Austin, Texas and raised in the Leander, Texas hill country, the native-born Augustinian James Redford is a young born again Christian who was converted from atheism by a direct revelation from Jesus Christ. He is a scientific rationalist who considers that the Omega Point (i.e., the physicists’ technical term for God) is an unavoidable result of the known laws of physics."What else need be said?James Redford > Stephan Kinsella see moreDivine revelation is a great tradition in Christianity, continuing after the events recorded in the New Testament to the present. Jesus Christ founded Western Civilization in these sense in which moderns think of it (i.e., in the modern sense, "Western Civilization" is pretty much an exact synonym for Christendom).So what is your point, N. Stephan Kinsella? Your point is that God cannot possibly exist and anyone who thinks He does is insane--or at least anyone who thinks that God can communicate with man.But it is you who is truly insane. Because your whole program of libertarianism is logically of no importance if God does not exist. For the details on this, see Sec. 8.1.1: "The Dysteleology of Life without God" of my article "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708, http://archive.org/details/The...InnerCynic > Stephan Kinsella see moreWhat else need be said? Expand upon that. Curious minds want to know.
davidzaduk > James Redford see moreHoly shit! If your point was to impress me with your vocabulary, job well done. After slogging through the ten dollar words your point is valid, but maybe you should couch it in the common vernacular to reach more people.vox > davidzaduk see moreThe people who need to understand this will understand the vocabulary. If they don't, they are intelligent and diligent enough to pick up a dictionary and use it. Does everything have to be dumbed down? I dare say that just reading a site like this indicates that the person is an intelligent and self-taught seeker of true knowledge who does not need things watered-down for easy consumption.Libertymike > vox see moreAmen. Phonies dumb down. An authentic intellectual NEVER genuflects to the common man or to the utterly profligate blue collar, anti-intellectual underpinnings of boobus americanus.vox > Libertymike see moreThanks Libertymike. The truth is though, the common man can understand these things. He chooses not to. If he does not, he failed to make the effort. He believes that black and white are the same color on so many things that his reasoning power in things blue collar may be good, but his common sense has been perverted. "By their fruits, you shall know them."
James Redford > davidzaduk see moreI use words as sharp implements to crack open people's skulls so that truth can be poured in. For a thoroughgoing intellective trepanation accompanying the inundation of veraciousness, read my above-cited article "The Physics of God and the Quantum Gravity Theory of Everything", doi:10.2139/ssrn.1974708.Jeremy > James Redford see moreMethinks, pedantic.vox > James Redford see moreAre you influenced by Teilhard de Chardin?
Tim see moreThere are valid conspiracy theories and invalid conspiracy theories. Just because someone doubts Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin of JFK or is skeptical of the official narrative of 9/11, doesn't make him a "conspiracy nut." It probably means he is well informed and hasn't suspended critical thought.
I have found those who quickly dismiss conspiracy theories to be poorly informed and rather gullible. Look up Operation Gladio, MKULTRA, or Northwoods.
And will someone tell me how World Trade Center 7 collapsed into its own footprint just like a controlled demolition? NIST and FEMA have not been able to explain it, or at least explain it in way that is consistent with the laws of physics. A skyscaper with asymmetrical damage cannot collapse symmetrically. Gravity makes any falling object follow the path of least resistance. For WTC 7 to collapse the way it did, all of its 87 columns needed to fail simultaneously. That is impossible. Now if the collapse of WTC7 is just what it looks like, controlled demolition, such an operation takes weeks to plan. This means there was foreknowledge of the attacks. Does it not? Very disturbing indeed, but that is where logic takes me.JR > Tim see moreThat may be true in general but when it comes to 9/11 conspiracy theories you must be trying to be funny if you think that anyone who adheres to them is being "well informed and hasn't suspended critical thought". Being skeptical doesn't mean dismissing the "official" explanation for anything just because its official. It means following the truth wherever it leads EVEN if it means having to grudgingly agree with the "official" view. Doing otherwise is itself sheepish. As for the WTC7 building this has been dealt with by non official folks like Manuel Garcia Jr at Counter Punch. Perhaps you should spend less time on the "Non Scholars for 9/11 Truth" website. Its crazy ideas like these that give Ron Paul, who does not believe in the 9/11 theories, rightly so, a bad name.Tim > JR see moreSo sporadic fires and burning office funiture caused a 47 story skyscraper's 87 support columns to fail simutaneously? Cause that is the only way that building collapses into its own footprint at free fall speed. And exploding deisel fuel tanks would n't do the job either. Gravity would have forced the building to slump over. What about eye witnesses who report explosions occuring in the WTC 7 before the Twin Towers collapsed. See Barry Jennings story. And how did the BBC's Jane Standley report on the WTC 7's collapse 20 minutes before it happened?
I guess I'm just "crazy" for asking those questions.Davekyte > Tim see moreSporadic Fires?
FDNY Fire Chief Dan Hayden was there and had this to say:"By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse."I have lost count how many times I have posted this here and on conspiracy theorist sites and it gets ignored by the truther. Hayden was there, he saw a 47 story building that was leaning and measured the lean with a "Transit" He saw a three story bulge in that same building! And truthers wonder how they knew the building may collapse?Tim > Davekyte see moreThe Fire Chief might have said that but that doesn't explain WTC 7's free fall symmetrical collapse which would have been impossible if it was caused by sporadic office fires and asymmetrical damage, which is what the Fire Chief appears to be describing. You're not addressing the questions raised by 9/11 skeptics. It doesn't matter how many times you post your remarks if they are irrelevent to the question at hand. Nor do you address the eye witness accounts that conflict with the official conspiracy theory. The fact is there many anamolies that cannot be reconciled with official narrative. It is only logical then to raise these questions, regardless of how disturbing they may be.
As I commented previously, both FEMA and NIST have failed to explain the collapse of WTC 7 in their reports. Of course, they avoid the only rational explanation, which is controlled demolition, because that would raise too many disturbing questions.
Tim > JR see moreYou're simply misinformed. Who has "dealt" with" question of WTC 7's mysterious collapse? And it remains a mystery because NIST and FEMA were unable to provide an explanation for it global collapse. That sir, is a matter of record. And when NIST was asked to provide the data they used for their computer modeling, they refused to do so citing "national security." Hmmm.
So tell us how did WTC 7 come down the way it did? Was the law of gravity suspended on 9/11?
The WTC 7 issue is only one of many casting doubt on the official conspiracy theory. Dismissing someon'e point as "crazy" is no argument. Remarks like that is why I wrote that people suspend critical thought.plenarchist > JR see moreNot so crazy. Watch this linked presentation. I'm a licensed engineer and now have serious concerns. Even if someone wants to dismiss the possibility that some element of the US gov might have been complicit in 911, there's no harm in a truly independent investigation. There is compelling and credible evidence that conflicts with the official narrative. If the gov has nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear, right? That's what they always preach to us sheeple as they take our rights away.Davekyte > plenarchist see moreOh By the way, when you try and support your conspiracies with YouTube, you have lost. If you like I can post links to real papers written by real structural engineers in real engineering journals who describe how fire brought the towers down.plenarchist > Davekyte see moreOf course, a lot of stuff on YT is nonsense. But quite a lot isn't. I linked to YT for convenience. Go to AE911Truth.org if that makes you feel better.
Davekyte > plenarchist see moreSO the fact Richard Gage was nothing more than a third rate architect before 9/11 does not impress me. When Leslie Earl Robertson the guy who actually was the structural engineer for the WTC says it was fire and NOT a controlled demolition. Recently the AIA disavowed any support of Gage.Tom > Davekyte see moreOne could be a fourth rate architect, or not even an architect at all and understand that a symmetrical free fall collapse cannot occur in a building suffering asymmetrical damage and is being driven down by simple gravity. The building would slump over in the direction of the path of least resistance.plenarchist > Davekyte see moreSo somehow your ad hom on the guy is supposed to be an argument? And I suppose the other 1700 people in AE911Truth are all crackpots also? How is he 3rd rate? And what does "AIA disavowed..." mean? You're making assertions here without any backup. Provide backup because I'm interested in their credibility. He (and AE911Truth) seem credible to me.And Roberton's testimony should be considered but he was also one of the engineers of record and is too close. There are many other issues. And then WTC7 was not struck by a plane...
Shane > JR see moreNah, building seven hasn't 'just been dealt with' because some writer refuses to admit the truth. And if you don't think Ron Paul knows what happened on 9/11, just look at his interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... . He knows, he just can't handle the controversy of it. His own words. Please become more informed.JR > Shane see moreWhere does he say he believes in these conspiracies in this video? The question was so vague that he could have interpreted it on one of many ways. When asked by Glenn Beck he denies it. Id rather believe Ron Paul at his word unlike you. To think that Paul who is brave enough to audit the Fed and take on its Chairman is all of a sudden too scared to reveal, because of controversy, any beliefs about 9/11 is unbelievable.
DaveAlaska see moreWow Tom. This kind of disgusting little darkness is normally beneath you. Just how do you take the edge off of Occam's razer like that? I've never visited "skeptcal libertarians" or whatnot, but the only reason I am a libertarian was because I was a massive skeptic. Being skeptical does not mean falling enthusiastically for every stupid conspiracy theory or every government plan that comes your way.But now, we have a bunch of nitwits who think that clouds are chems and that fire temperatures are controlled by combustant rather than containment. Am I to defenestrate chemistry and engineering because we are all social metaphysicians now? Fuck I hope you retract this pornography as soon as possible so I can see it as an aberration rather than a damnation. It is the first time I have noticed how strongly the Catholic mysticsm has rotted your mind.Tom Woods Mod > DaveAlaska see moreLeaving aside the absurd reference to "Catholic mysticism," whatever that means, why is there such an insistence on treating medicine, or often science in general, _as practiced_, as if it were some platonic endeavor, pure and pristine, straight out of Francis Bacon. Talk about superstition! Let's pretend there are no vested interests, intellectual inertia, government funding bias, etc. Don't give me the chemtrails b.s., as if anyone who raises an eye at the pharmaceutical establishment is a worshipper of Zeus.AE Hall > Tom Woods see moreAnd just how do you reconcile this superstition against the need for herd immunization? Whether or not there is vested interest in achieving this end for specific individuals, whether it be through profit or government grant of privilege, don't you even trust a bit of science like this? Certainly you, of all people, are not as gullible as Hoppe?DaveAlaska > Tom Woods see moreThank the Great Boggle you clarified that. It looked for a moment like you were going down the 911 Truther or Chemtrail rabbit holes. Next I was preparing to read Tom Woods' missives about the HAARP rays or somesuch. I'll research the skepticals when I get a chance. I agree with you that big pharma and Agro are literally killing us with manipulative science and government collusion. OK, you are off the dart board.DaveAlaska > DaveAlaska see moreI've been hit with an unending series of increasingly stupid conspiracy theories lately. Perhaps you could speak to the fact that being skeptical of those many theories is indeed proper skepticism. It is like mass hysteria is the new norm of libertarianism. Even the Aurora massacre has its own conspiracy theory starting up, which will soon be chock full of bogus claims, conjectures, connections and massive confirmation bias.Zeus > DaveAlaska see more"Don't give me the chemtrails b.s., as if anyone who raises an eye at the pharmaceutical establishment is a worshipper of Zeus."Be skeptical of big pharma, my children. Hold off on chemtrails, for now.
vox > DaveAlaska see moreThank the "Great Boggle" Tom is "off your dart board." I was going to stop reading his books and listening to his lectures just on your say-so.
DaveAlaska > Tom Woods see moreCarry on old man. LOL!
Tom Woods Mod > DaveAlaska see moreWhat is "disgusting" is your ridiculous reply, which jumps immediately into chemtrails. Come on. Surely I deserve better than that.George Geankoplis > Tom Woods see morea whole bunch of the guys on that page are into that primal diet, and aware that the medical community is generally wrong about diet, presently. I know I think the medical community grossly over prescribes antidepressants, I suspect a bunch of the SLS guys agree. If I thought about it, I could definitely come up with several more examples of divergence between the accepted, received wisdom of the medical community, or the powers that be in general, that are pretty widely held on that page.In my experience, it's really only the wackier theories that engender real hostility on the part of most the people there, myself included. I think there really are some ideas regarding medical issues that some people in the libertarian community hold that really are dangerously divorced from reality to a point that it really becomes somewhat immoral not to speak out against it. I'm talking specifically about vaccines and AIDS denialism. The science is just to clear to ignore.Perry Mason > George Geankoplis see morePlease. Vaccines and AIDS are industries that would largely not exist if it were not for direct and indirect government involvement.I am as mainstream as they come in many ways -- a transactional attorney at one of the world's largest law firms -- but even I can see that mainstream science on Vaccines and AIDS is incomplete and full of errors.
AIDS is a much easier case than Vaccines. Have you even tried to read Peter Duesberg's opus on the subject? It is as relevant today as it was back in 1995 when it was written.I understand, and even empathize, with your discomfort over some of the gullibility in the conspiracy world. But give it some perspective. The Government, when it isn't lying or committing crimes outright, at least indirectly through all the skewed incentives and regulation causes many dogmas of mainstream science/education/etc to persist despite being completely erroneous. It is hard to blame the less educated/sophisticated among us for seeing perhaps one too many shadows.I suspect you don't like being lumped in with such types, as they are not as socially prestigious. This means you may have an ego problem and excessively care for your image. But there are reasons why sometimes it is the lowly and unsophisticated who have to teach us or guide us to the truth, and why we have to let go of needing to be accepted by some ever-changing cultural group that we perceive as being important.George Geankoplis > Perry Mason see moreI just like to add that I don't think it's possible for a sane person to engage in AIDS denialism without having some sort of ideological ax to grind. I think it's morally reprehensible on its face, and people spouting that garbage should be ashamed of themselves. There is no essential moral difference between AIDS denialism and Holocaust denial, in my book.Perry Mason > George Geankoplis see moreWhat a ridiculous trope. "AIDS denialism"? Really? Your reasoning is no different from the common Soviet tactic of attacking someone's sanity instead of addressing his argument. You are also only regurgitating the idiotic (and vile) refrain given to Peter Duesberg.Frankly, if you are familiar with the literature, I find you would have to be fairly gullible to believe (1) that AIDS exists as described by Gallo et al. and (2) that HIV causes AIDS. But this isn't a website to argue these points.I have no ideological axe to grind, whatever that means. However, your "there is no essential moral difference" comment implies it is you with the axe to grind.The "denialism" mentality is a sick and dangerous one. Some thoughts are so terrible they cannot even be mentioned, apparently. Welcome to the brave new world. I am sad to see such opinions on Tom Woods' website of all places.
Top Commenters on Tom Woods | The official website for author Tom Woods
Top Discussions on Tom Woods | The official website for author Tom Woods
Nothing for you here ... yet. But as you comment with Disqus and follow other Disqus users, you will start to receive notifications here, as well as a personalized feed of activity by you and the people you follow. So get out there and participate in some discussions!
BLOGROLL
UPCOMING EVENTS
Latest Events-
Houston, TX
-
Chestertown, MD
-
Grove City, PA