Miraculous Cure For Hiv "reported" By Chiang Mai School - Praise The Lord

[hellodolly]

I believe nothing without evidence. Theory and speculation is just that until there is evidence.

And then, after a while, new evidence appears that is stronger than the old evidence. And so my beliefs change.

The problem with religion is that it doesn't allow you to change your mind when faced with new evidence.

Thankfully the school who's calender brought about this topic provides an environment where these fools are kept from the rest of society.

Unfortunately, claims like some supposed superior being having the ability to cure HIV will mean those uneducated ones from the mountains without access to free healthcare, struck down with this disease will die young unnecessarily. Wouldn't it be better if the vast sums of money available within these religions to spend were spent on drugs helping to prevent the progress of HIV to AIDS, rather than being spent sponsoring Missionaries to go out mis-educating?

Speaking of mis-educating. Mind telling us where you were educated to be so broad minded? Religion allows you to change your mind when faced with new evidence. The problem being there is no new evidence. Under your belief system you can become a tree if new evidence appears.

Hint

Don't hold your breath.

Some things we except as fact and don't go looking for new evidence such as I except you are a human being and do not go looking for new evidence to disprove it. I except that there is a God and I have no understanding what ever just certain beliefs. I leave the searching to others I am to busy to waste my time on it. I am willing to listen to new evidence that there is no god if you have any but I doubt you really looked.

To each there own. Religion has brought peace and prosperity to many. It has also brought death and disease along with poverty to many. Pick your side and go with it or do as I do yes there is a God and I have a belief about him that would not fit into a narrow set of parameters. This allows me to be open for new insights or proofs that there is not a God.

[uptheos]

I'm very pleased that the girl is no longer HIV positive and may she have a long and happy life.

Edited January 23, 2013 by uptheos

[Jingthing]

I'm very pleased that the girl is no longer HIV positive and may she have a long and happy life.

I don't believe she ever was HIV positive and one positive test is no proof that she ever was.

Talking about God fairy tales here. People engineers the tests and the lab results. People are flawed. These tests have an ERROR rate. Duh! Now if you show us a well documented case of advanced symptomatic AIDS with a track of positive tests, and then prayers reverse that to clean tests and full health, drop us non-believers a line.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Jingthing

[hellodolly]

Seriously, it is extraordinary how people do scoff at others who have religion. But what do these scoffers believe in?

sometimes have no problem to believe in dark forces, satanism, astrology, ghosts, people possessed by a devil..so much manner of BS.. but yet still refuse to accept any possibility that there could be the opposing white or pure force

in life is the best lesson..that everything has its opposite, can you just believe on one side?

...... actually the "dark forces" you mention are usually only believed in by the religious/superstitious, skeptics reject all that due to lack of proof, we do not reject the possibility, but the probability is very very low. For hellodolly, the claims made in this case are NOT documented evidence, they are (to my knowlege) undocumented claims. To call skeptics "closed minded" is obsurd, we are open to reviewing credable evedence, not wild unfounded claims. Get it?

I get it what you are open to is believing credible claims that are later proved false. The one common denominator here is you every thing has to conform to your view of what credible is. I do not call skeptics close minded by the very definition of the word they are open to different answers than what they believe in. That is why I am a skeptic. Closed minded in this case would be an atheist even agnostic's are open to new answers.

In this case I am extremly sceptical as I have not bothered nor will I to set up the concditions that would prove she had HIV. if that was a proven case then I would have to set up a new set of test to prove that she does not have it now. If having passed both those tests I would have to set up a new set of tests that she was cured by turning her life over to God.

Do you see my reluctance to take an Athiestic approach t5o this. Besides it is of no concern to me I am only concerned with what we put on this board.

I personnaly doubt it but I am open all though I believe it highly unlikly unlike some supposed sceptics who are not open.

[NeverSure]

Oh I see. We know all that is or that could be in the whole of the universe, stretched from time and distance unfathomable, yet we can't be sure we get an HIV test right, nor do we have a clue how to cure it.

At least some are honest enough to say "I don't know."

[Jingthing]

Oh I see. We know all that is or that could be in the whole of the universe, stretched from time and distance unfathomable, yet we can't be sure we get an HIV test right, nor do we have a clue how to cure it.

At least some are honest enough to say "I don't know."

So you're making a case for agnosticism, it seems.

[hellodolly]

It is not very unusual at all for HIV tests to show false positives and later be proven negative.

miracles perhaps.

I agree with you but who is to say the initial diagnose was false and the new one is not false. Why can only one set of tests be false and one never wrong.

[uptheos]

I'm very pleased that the girl is no longer HIV positive and may she have a long and happy life.

I don't believe she ever was HIV positive and one positive test is no proof that she ever was.

Talking about God fairy tales here. People engineers the tests and the lab results. People are flawed. These tests have an ERROR rate. Duh! Now if you show us a well documented case of advanced symptomatic AIDS with a track of positive tests, and then prayers reverse that to clean tests and full health, drop us non-believers a line.

Is this response in general or directed at me?

[hellodolly]

-snip- To call skeptics "closed minded" is obsurd, we are open to reviewing credable evedence, not wild unfounded claims. Get it?

I wonder. If there is a supernatural power, by definition would we be able to see it? We can see that which is natural, of course.

If we say that if we can't see it, it doesn't (for us) exist, is that a definition of closed minded?

If it is supernatural and we are natural, what causes us to think we could observe it?

No offense intended, but if I thought I could observe and pass judgement on everything in the universe, I would expect to be seen as arrogant.

Valid questions, I feel humble that I (we) know so little, The arroganceis in those that claim to have all the answers as contained in their scriptures and fairy tales.

and the arrogance that they have all the answers in there Laboratories or that they have access to them via other means.Such a dilemma what ever is one to do.

[DowntownAl]

"Are people really allowed to print such blatant untruths?"

That's how religion (all of them) has made it's bucks and controlled the masses for centuries.

[Loaded]

I'm praying for at least 3 goals against Swansea away from home in the Carling One Cup tonight.

Chelsea need a miracle to get through to the final.

If this happens, I know God answered my prayers and is a Chelsea fan.

[NeverSure]

So you're making a case for agnosticism, it seems.

Actually, I wasn't intending to make a case for anything. I was just marveling at how some can claim to have a final answer to all from their tiny vantage points, and their microscopic lifetimes, and claim with such audacity that if they haven't seen it, it doesn't exist.

[hellodolly]

People amaze me. I, and the place I stand, are less than a speck of dust in the universe. I can't begin to comprehend all that might be out there. Yet if my eyes haven't seen it, it doesn't exist?

If man could only cure the common cold or in this case HIV, I might begin to take his feelings of omniscience a tiny bit more seriously.

The only thing I can rationally say is that I don't know.

Now you are sounding like a reasonable scientist.

When I stop to think how much we don't know it is to much for my mind. A couple billion stars in are galaxies and a couple billion Galaxies and now they are saying there is the possibility of more planets than stars. If that isn't enough they say they think there is black matter out there that is larger than all the matter in the universe but they can't find it. Then we get into black energy.

[DowntownAl]

-snip- To call skeptics "closed minded" is obsurd, we are open to reviewing credable evedence, not wild unfounded claims. Get it?

I wonder. If there is a supernatural power, by definition would we be able to see it? We can see that which is natural, of course.

If we say that if we can't see it, it doesn't (for us) exist, is that a definition of closed minded?

If it is supernatural and we are natural, what causes us to think we could observe it?

No offense intended, but if I thought I could observe and pass judgement on everything in the universe, I would expect to be seen as arrogant.

Valid questions, I feel humble that I (we) know so little, The arroganceis in those that claim to have all the answers as contained in their scriptures and fairy tales.

and the arrogance that they have all the answers in there Laboratories or that they have access to them via other means.Such a dilemma what ever is one to do.

No one in a lab (an actual scientific lab that is) claims to have all the answers to anything, and anyone who does is generally a fraud. Science is a progressive step-by-step process. Out of it occasionally comes a magic bullet that lasts for a while. But mostly it is an incremental process not built on belief system but in provable reproducible results.

[hellodolly]

I'm praying for at least 3 goals against Swansea away from home in the Carling One Cup tonight.

Chelsea need a miracle to get through to the final.

If this happens, I know God answered my prayers and is a Chelsea fan.

If you insist on making this a sporting thing can you throw in a few prayers for the San Francisco Forty Niners. Not that I think they will need them but------------

[NeverSure]

No one in a lab (an actual scientific lab that is) claims to have all the answers to anything, and anyone who does is generally a fraud. Science is a progressive step-by-step process. Out of it occasionally comes a magic bullet that lasts for a while. But mostly it is an incremental process not built on belief system but in provable reproducible results.

You're helping me make my point. We can't get "into the lab" called the universe. We have no idea what's out there. If it's supernatural, then it isn't of our nature and we probably couldn't see it. We can't begin to make observations about the universe. There is a lot more we don't know than what we do know.

Our laboratories may look like a child's chemistry set to some beings we haven't met yet. We just don't know what's out there and lacking the ability to make observations, we can't make any scientific claims.

I believe that to say we have the answers is the height of arrogance.

[Jingthing]

Science has more and better answers than hocus pocus religion.

[NeverSure]

Science has more and better answers than hocus pocus religion.

I'm happy that you are putting all of your faith into science. When you get a terminal illness, it won't cure you. It can't even cure your cold. You're on your own, all alone in a universe neither you nor I know much about. Your lifetime is a blink of an eye in time.

All I'm saying is that I'm happy for you that you know so much more than I do.

[Jingthing]

Science has more and better answers than hocus pocus religion.

I'm happy that you are putting all of your faith into science. When you get a terminal illness, it won't cure you. It can't even cure your cold. You're on your own, all alone in a universe neither you nor I know much about. Your lifetime is a blink of an eye in time.

All I'm saying is that I'm happy for you that you know so much more than I do.

Where did you get the idea that science cures all disease or has prevented one inevitable death, as we all do die, science/religion or not. Face it, religion exists so that people can deal with the fear of death and the unknown. We are wired for it. Science provides a RATIONAL alternative. Edited January 23, 2013 by Jingthing

[babyjesus]

praise me!

[Phronesis]

Simple mistake blown out of proportion with careless reporting.

The girl was suffering from HIVES.

[MAJIC]

Or possibly misdiagnosis,i.e mix up in patients blood samples!

[eyecatcher]

All that phone sex has long since caught up with me............I have hearing aids... what...come again?

[Rancid]

It is not very unusual at all for HIV tests to show false positives and later be proven negative.

There are natural remedies for very good results with HIV, although I won't bother posting them again, or perhaps I should say ways to get the immune system fortified to provide good white cell counts.

Regardless, religion is an issue of faith, faith also can translate to enabling the body through activating unknown resources to deal with diseases. Of course it isn't the brand of religion that is important just the attitude that taps the subconscience the right way, sorry Grace.

[jambco984]

I don't think any of us here know enough to say one way or the other.

Well the pair of you are just party poopers. That was the bones of an interesting thread that you just killed.

In actual fact only last week I nearly sh*****d a ladyboy. Picked him up in a night club.

He looked like a woman; he smelled like a woman; danced like a woman and even kissed like a woman.

But as we arrived back at his apartment he reversed his car into a tight parking slot in one fluid movement...! Thats when I thought "Hang on just a minute....."

and thus I was saved of HIV

Just spat my water out. Funny as you like

[Rasseru]

Religion. A false positive.

[SteeleJoe]

No one in a lab (an actual scientific lab that is) claims to have all the answers to anything, and anyone who does is generally a fraud. Science is a progressive step-by-step process. Out of it occasionally comes a magic bullet that lasts for a while. But mostly it is an incremental process not built on belief system but in provable reproducible results.

You're helping me make my point. We can't get "into the lab" called the universe. We have no idea what's out there. If it's supernatural, then it isn't of our nature and we probably couldn't see it. We can't begin to make observations about the universe. There is a lot more we don't know than what we do know.

Our laboratories may look like a child's chemistry set to some beings we haven't met yet. We just don't know what's out there and lacking the ability to make observations, we can't make any scientific claims.

I believe that to say we have the answers is the height of arrogance.

We have some answers, there's nothing arrogant about acknowledging that. No credible scientists claim anything even remotely similar to having all the answers.

In thousands of years religion has never provided a single answer that has supplanted any provided by science. Not one. While it is an abvious fact that the opposite is not the case....

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

[LarryBird]

Can God calculate really big numbers?

[Rasseru]

Simple mistake blown out of proportion with careless reporting.

The girl was suffering from HIVES.

That's a swell interpretation.

[partington]

I must say if it's a choice between believing in a story printed in one paragraph on a religiously-sponsored calendar, and the weight of scientific evidence accumulated over 30 or 40 years and tested by experimentation and validation in laboratories all over the world, of course the religious calendar has much greater weight.

I mean think how hard it is to print a paragraph in a calendar, compared to the ludicrously tiny effort involved in settiing up laboratories, staffing them, applying for grants, conceiving and carrying out meaningful experiments, writing up the results as scientific papers, submitting the papers to anonymous review by leaders in the field, often having to do more work or re-analyse your results based on the reviewers' comments, and finally being allowed to publish the results and have them confirmed by other groups in the field repeating your work and getting the same results or disproved by them getting different results.

O wait a minute. I guess printing a paragraph in a calendar might take less effort and be less trustworthy after all.