People don't claim they made a virus from nothing, it's more to do with genetically modifying exist virus to change them into something more lethal. The same thing happens on the end of the scale to make medicine more effective.

One theory is that it could have been the virus visnu (which is very simular to HIV)genetically modified with Human T-cell Leukemia Virus, which affects white blood cells.

The ethical reasons are something to debate, but I wouldn't say that it is physically impossible to do this sort of shit.

The facts are that AIDs appeared in the late 70s and there is still no known whereabouts of the source. The official account is that it came from monkeys, but this is still a theory, which is yet to be confirmed after many years of research.

The reason a lot of people debunk the idea that is was made in a lab is becuase of contraversial ideas behind it. Scientifically speaking, it's still one possible place that AIDs came from according to a lot of scientists.

can you show me anything about these scientists who say "hey it coulda been made from a lab" because until you show me these credible scientists with their research you are just like doktormartini and veganism

dude AIDs was not created in a lab, please stop saying this

its far from the stupidest conspiracy theory but yeah still a dumb one.

http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/cohen/266-5191-1642a.pdf read dis.

Here are some links I have found from doctors and scientists, just to show that I'm not making this shit up. I haven't said I believe any of this, but shold be respected as a possible reason regardless of ethical ridiculousness of it all

http://www.politicalgateway.com/news/read.html?id=5420

Alan Cantwell, MD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakob_Segal

http://www.righto.com/theories/strecker.html

Robert Strecker, MD

http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_1597.shtml

Dr. Boyd Graves

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Gallo

http://www.whale.to/b/strecker.html

...you really don't want to play the LINKS game with this pal.

because I am pretty sure we'd win.

this is like the 9/11 conspiracy theory man.

I'd like you to look at this without the whole 'they did it to kill the blacks and gays'. I'm not saying that THIS IS WHERE AIDS CAME FROM I'm just saying that its a possible origin scientifically speaking, but becuase of what it means if it is true, people ignore it.

If you think it's ridiculous becuase you dont believe that this is physically possible and that AIDs definitley came from monkeys in Africa, then fair enough. But if you think it's ridiculous becuase its all conspiracy shit and America would never do this, then you're not looking at this objectively

it's ridiculous for both man. granted, as I said earlier in the topic, America is definitely far from the best when it comes to treating their minority citizens and there's a good deal of evidence that Reagan sat on AIDS until it became an epidemic, but to suggest they engineered AIDS is pretty ridiculous.

HIV/AIDS did not first appear in the 70s.

the first confirmed case was a Congolese man in 1959

I just re-read this topic and actually laughed at a loud at how ridiculous I look trying to proove AIDS WAS AN INSIDE JOBS whilst posting links to wikipedia.

Let me just explain something about me (gay). I really hate someone saying THIS IS RIGHT or THIS IS WRONG. I'm pretty open to lots of different interruptations on anything and I think it's one of my traits that helps me be creative.

I'm not saying that I believe any of this shit. All I can really believe in is what I do (shit philosophy time). I enjoy reading up on these CONSPIRACY THEORIES becuase I find them really interesting that someone else has found a different interruptation on what is percieved FACT. It's like when you watch a movie and you're pretty sure you have it sussed out, then someone comes up with a different theory on the film, which sounds ridiculous but sometimes technically plauseable.

They're entertaining at least and the idea that the world is ONE BIG INSIDE JOB is a phenomenal tale if you read the whole history of events starting from the knights templar in the 11th Century.

So yeah, this shit appeals to me as its a different interpretation that will at least leave you asking or re-asking questions that you previously took for granted. Or it's just all horseshit and the world works exactly as we are told it does. Either way I'll probably never know, so I can't really back either

I won't post this sort of stuff again though as I understand that it's not really appropiate in forum talking about serious issues etc (not that its not a serious issue, but ya know)

This is weird: http://www.slate.com/id/2190589/
Is Michelle Obama responsible for the Wright fiasco?

Hitchens suggests that Michelle's pandering to "black separationism" is what caused Obama's "link" with Wright, and made him so hesitant to denounce that link. He even goes on to draw a parallel between Barrack-Michelle and Bill-Hillary (of the 90s). Idk, kind of interesting.

Anyone that has read his autobiography, does Barrack seem as church-driven as Wright?

what was aids genetically modified from?

Simian immunodeficiency virus.  AIDS wasn't actually created in a lab and if Wright had any scientific knowledge, he'd have known that the disease started with infected primates in Africa.  Probably transmitted through blood of slaughtered chimps which are eaten by quite a few people on that continent.

Hitchens is kind of a bad guy and if I remember right HATES MUSLIMS MORE THAN ANYTHING, and this reads like more of his stupid shit.

Hitchens is kind of a bad guy and if I remember right HATES MUSLIMS MORE THAN ANYTHING, and this reads like more of his stupid shit.

This is true, he does not like the Muslims (or any religious person for the matter)

Listen, EVEN IF IT WAS POSSIBLE to create AIDS, Reverend Wright would NOT be someone who would have any legitimate knowledge of it.