We point to this phenomenon of how easily religious belief triumphs over the most irrefutable evidence to the contrary, in order to challenge all critics of HIV/AIDS to answer this question:
How does this kind of thought-resistant religiosity differ in the slightest from the twenty year adherence of believers in HIV to their favored dogma in the face of similar overwhelming evidence against the belief?
We suggest that there is an exact equivalence, as follows:
Science – Religion
Theory – Dogma
Conference Hall – Church
HIV – The Devil
David Ho – Son of God
AZT, ddI, Protease Inhibitors, Nevirapine – Holy Water
David Baltimore – Pope
Anthony Fauci – Bishop
Robert Gallo – High Priest
NIH Granting Process – Inquisition
Activists – Missionaries
Patients – Penitents
Taxpayer support – Vatican holdings and collections
Paradigm critics – Heretics
Canceled funding – The stake
Evidence overwhelmingly against – Evidence overwhelmingly against.
All objections converted to supporting evidence – All objections converted to supporting evidence.
We cannot discern any difference at all between the two paradigms in nature or shape. However, we have no doubt those cleverer than us will be able to find some difference, however small.
“Irrefutable” evidence that HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, eh? With apologies to Inigo Montoya, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Image from http://media.lawrence.com/img/photos/2005/04/07/inigomontoya.jpg