More On Moore: Part Deux

UPDATE!

After a TKO and a humiliating post-TKO press conference, our valiant,
newly-appointed wanna-be major general in the AID$ war, John P. Moore,
took the strategically unsound initiative of going after the referee! He
should have left the stage while he still had a chance:

PART I: THE TECHNICAL KNOCKOUT:
===============================
Citing chronic cowardice, Moore ducks the fight!

PART II: THE PROFESSOR'S POST-TKO PRESS CONFERENCE:
===================================================

No, wait, Moore joins the scrum!

PART III: MOORE TAKES ON THE MODERATOR:
=======================================

Moore unleashed -- a torrid of flailing e-mails!

FURTHER UPDATE!

I wrote Prof. Moore alerting him to this post, and in his  haughty little  e-mail voice (think Elton John with a Phd), the Brit Twit responded immediately and predictably, referring me to an obscure quote in a vacuous West Wing episode -- How erudite, John.

He claims he doesn't debate with "AIDS Denialists," which, of course, is  another lie -- as seen by his lenghthy and increasingly deranged e-mail messagess, skillfully deflected by Doc Brown.

More so, his groundbreaking reasearch on "monkey sex gel" is stale --already been done in  2000  per Nature Medicine.

So, tell us, John, as a top-notch "Colonel" of AIDS research, is this all you do all day? Fiddle around with monkey gel and write meaningless e-mails?

But what can you expect from a real "AIDS Denialist"

Comments

[Dan]

Hank,
Moore's "reasoning" for why orthodox scientists don't debate the "denialists" is so inane and unconvincing that a grade-schooler could see through it.

He says such a debate doesn't occur because: debate should only occur between credible scientists, but no credible scientist would dispute the role of "HIV" in "AIDS".

C'mon! What a lark!

[HankBarnes]

He also writes much more like an activist, than a scientist. Since he rarely, if ever, cites any scientific work.

HB

[Schwartz]

Hank,

Why doesn't Moore address the Padian report?

Aside from the silliness, I think that's a valid issue.

[Darin Brown]

"He claims he doesn't debate with 'AIDS Denialists,' which, of course, is another lie"

Not quite accurate. He does *communicate* with "AIDS denialists", but he does not *debate* them. Debate entails defending your claims and responding to critics. There is little real debate at the three links above, but a lot of "internet chit-chat".

[George]

"Internet chit chat" to be sure, and quite amusing and educational chit chat at that.

"Professor Poseur" seems a rather gentle epithet. "Professor Pendejo" is more to the 'point', I think.

[Gene Semon]

Hank,

Thanks for the compliment over at Tara's place.

At least we can thank Viji for not indulging in such .... behaviour, (words fail me here) of the great and powerful Wizard of... oh, I mean esteemed professor who obviously knows everything there is to know in molecular biology.

Where do you even start with a guy like that? I guess with Dorothy... as Harvey and Darin Brown have done so well.

BTW, I wonder what he thinks of antidenialist Viji's HUGE error on human reverse transcriptase, posted for the entire world to see. Note also how they don't respond to Wilhelm's or your substantive points nor acknowledge basic errors such as the size of TMV and TYMV viruses.

Anyhoo, over to Tara's ...

Best regards,
Gene

[Gene Semon]

Unfortunately, Viji is now coming a bit unglued over there.

[HankBarnes]

Gene,

It's a bloody mess over there -- like that movie, "The Blob."

Well done:)

HB

[Dean Esmay]

It's amazingly fun to watch people make idiots of themselves.

They can't win a fair argument and what's worse, they know they can't.