I'm not one for Guartzian theories, but...

[Saga]

well no actually, i still think it's a load of shit. but my associate at work is big into this AIDS conspiracy thing. turns out there's a patent for a device way back in 1994 using Ag4O4 molecules to kill the HIV/AIDS virus: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/53364 ... ption.html

my associate thinks it's some huge conspiracy for the government and for pharmaceutical companies to make a bunch of money continuously off people for a long period of time, but i dont buy into it. although with that patent from 1994, it is kind of weird i guess. and given the tuskegee syphilis debacle i wouldnt put it past our government to do something like this. i just think the social ramifications of keeping something like this under wraps would be enormous, that'd have to be the dumbest thing in the world. everyone else's thoughts? im just curious. also this makes the south park episode where kyle/cartman get HIV a bit more interesting.

[Alleya]

Companies patent theories all the time. Just because there's a patent on it doesn't mean it actually works. I was listening to some show about pharmaceuticals on NPR the other day--those companies get something like a couple thousand patents a DAY.

If it turned out to work, they'd probably want a patent.

Also, if it was some government conspiracy, I think step 1 would to be to cover up its existence, not patent it so any joe blow average can find it.

Edit: Another source

http://www.google.com/patents?hl=en&lr= ... Ag4O4+AIDs

[Saga]

I agree with you, I think the government would have covered it up instead of patenting it. But now there are studies being done with nanotechnology and using nanoparticles of silver to successfully kill the virus and essentially replicate the results in these patents. Also, if the government patents the cure, then anyone who comes along and says "hey i found the cure for aids" can just be blocked by the patent already in place. Without a patent, once the cure is eventually discovered by other scientists then there's no more money to be had.

Like I said, I don't believe in any of this shit, I just find it interesting and kind of silly at the same time.

[Myst]

anyone try to read that actual explanation of the patent?

The present invention relates to the employment of molecular crystals as bactericidal, viricidal and algicidal devices, but more particularly to the molecular semiconductor crystal tetrasilver tetroxide Ag4 O4 which has two trivalent and two monovalent silver atoms per molecule, and which through this structural configuration enables electronic activity on a molecular scale capable of killing algae and bacteria via the same mechanism as macroscale electron generators. The concept of molecular scale semiconductor devices for the storage of information has been the subject of much activity in recent years so that the concept of a molecular scale device performing such functions as storing information or acting as resistors, capacitors or photovoltaic devices is well accepted. The molecular device of this invention is a multivalent silver diamagnetic semiconductor. Now the bactericidal activity of soluble divalent silver (Ag II) complex bactericides is the subject of U.S. Pat. No. 5,017,285 of the present inventor. The inventor has also been granted U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,078,902, 5,073,382, 5,089,275, and 5,098,582, which all deal with Ag II bactericides but more particularly with (respectively) halides, alkaline pH, stabilized complexes and the divalent oxide. It is the last patent, i.e., U.S. Pat. No. 5,098,582, and its perfection that has led to my original concept of the molecular device of the present invention. Now said patent designated AgO as divalent silver oxide, the popular name of the compound. Indeed, the Merck Index (11th Edition) designates the oxide as silver(II) oxide (AGO) (entry 8469). However, it also states that it is actually a silver(I)-silver(III) oxide with a molecular weight of 123.88. Said oxide is actually on a molecular level Ag4 O4 where one pair of silver ions in the molecule is trivalent and another pair is monovalent.

The rocket knows where it is at all times. it knows where it is, because it knows where it isn't.

[Khamsin]

The main argument against conspiracy theories I would have is this:

Anyone seriously researching a cure would obviously want their results heard, otherwise why even bother if you're just trying to cover it up? Now, you could assume the government shuts them up or something, but all it takes is one of those researchers to publish their findings in a peer reviewed journal or otherwise make their research public to uncover the conspiracy. Regardless of patents or government coverups, anybody who found something that works would be able to let the world know rather easily. Why keep it a secret, if you know the government won't let you make any money off it? May as well make it public, even if it means giving up your proprietary knowledge of it.

Unless you think anybody who gets "too close" gets v&.

The only way the government could obstruct the cure for AIDS is to hinder funding, not wait for the cure to be found then keep it quiet. Plus, as in any conspiracy, there would be a bunch of people in various positions who know about it but are keeping quiet. You'd think somebody would talk, at some point. Unlike secret military technology, not everybody may agree with keeping a cure quiet.

[guartz]

You guys ever read the river by edward hooper?

Good read.

[Demosthenes11]

anybody that thinks AIDS is any sort of a government conspiracy is a certifiable nutjob

[Slapper]

anybody that thinks AIDS is any sort of a government conspiracy is a certifiable nutjob

thats what the government wants you to think!!

[Mizango]

"Guartzian theories" lol. Its funny because EVERYONE here automatically knows what that entails. Guartz and is not only synonymous with conspiracies but it is universally accepted.


The Aids thing strikes me as intriguing. Not saying it is true or not because I have no proof in either direction, but there is no money in a "cure" for anything. Whether it be war on disease or the war on "drugs" there are people that rely on these jobs and the billions and billions of dollars that changes hands.



blah masons blah blah NWO, Illuminati, blah blah [insert other theories here]

[Khamsin]

"Guartzian theories" lol. Its funny because EVERYONE here automatically knows what that entails. Guartz and is not only synonymous with conspiracies but it is universally accepted.


The Aids thing strikes me as intriguing. Not saying it is true or not because I have no proof in either direction, but there is no money in a "cure" for anything. Whether it be war on disease or the war on "drugs" there are people that rely on these jobs and the billions and billions of dollars that changes hands.



blah masons blah blah NWO, Illuminati, blah blah [insert other theories here]

Of course there's money in a cure. Imagine if there was a simple cure for cancer, in pill form. And you were the sole patent owner of such a medication. Now imagine how much money you'd have after curing the entire world.

Now imagine why on earth you'd want to still be working, instead of retired to some private island nation you just bought? Not to mention, you'd also be a hero and remembered for all time just like whats-his-butt that cured polio.

Another way to look at it, is this:

The medicine industry isn't one giant entity, it's full of competition amongst themselves. So long as there is no cure for a disease, the people making money are those that provide the current "treatment".

Take cancer again. Right now, the people making money are the chemotherapy people and equipment providers. What's to stop the competition from providing pills that completely inhibit cancer, so long as you keep taking them? That would ensure people are hooked on your pills while also stealing business away from your competition. If such a thing existed, what would be the motivation for someone to let their competition keep their business? The prisoner paradox or whatever the hell it's called applies just as much to conspiracies as it does anything else.

[guartz]

Watching you guys talking about conspiracy theories is like watching a white guys addressing racism. Equally hilarious in the awkwardness.


"Well, i'm no conspiracy theorists, but look here, isn't that interesting, again i'm not a conspiracy theorists, I just wanna make that clear."


lol

[Jefe]

Imagine if there was a simple cure for cancer, in pill form. And you were the sole patent owner of such a medication. Now imagine how much money you'd have after curing the entire world.

Now imagine...

Imagine the "cure" mutated into a virus affecting 90% of the world's population, turning into violent and almost irrational beings which feed on others' flesh. Now imagine yourself being the lone survivuor living in New York with your dog, lets name her "sam," and your ultimate goal is to find a cure...

[evilbau]

Watching you guys talking about conspiracy theories is like watching a white guys addressing racism. Equally hilarious in the awkwardness.


"Well, i'm no conspiracy theorists, but look here, isn't that interesting, again i'm not a conspiracy theorists, I just wanna make that clear."


lol

you are right, we should defer to the pros on wack job theories

[Saga]

The main argument against conspiracy theories I would have is this:

Anyone seriously researching a cure would obviously want their results heard, otherwise why even bother if you're just trying to cover it up? Now, you could assume the government shuts them up or something, but all it takes is one of those researchers to publish their findings in a peer reviewed journal or otherwise make their research public to uncover the conspiracy. Regardless of patents or government coverups, anybody who found something that works would be able to let the world know rather easily. Why keep it a secret, if you know the government won't let you make any money off it? May as well make it public, even if it means giving up your proprietary knowledge of it.

Unless you think anybody who gets "too close" gets v&.

The only way the government could obstruct the cure for AIDS is to hinder funding, not wait for the cure to be found then keep it quiet. Plus, as in any conspiracy, there would be a bunch of people in various positions who know about it but are keeping quiet. You'd think somebody would talk, at some point. Unlike secret military technology, not everybody may agree with keeping a cure quiet.

This is pretty much what I said to the guy about it - someone would HAD to have talked eventually, or some leak must have occurred if conspiracy truly was the case. Although again, looking at the tuskegee syphilis case, it went on for 40 years before it was found out. Who's to say someone won't come forward 25 years from now and disclose what we're discussing now?

edit: also this guy caught me on my way out of work and talked to me for another like 5 minutes >_> i told him what i think Alleya said; if there was a conspiracy, wouldn't the first thing the government do is cover it up and not patent it? then he asked me what i think the government would rather be accused of; knowing the cure exists or covering it up? just something to think about. again, i'm not a proponent of any of this, i just find it interesting to discuss.

[guartz]

you are right, we should defer to the pros on wack job theories

You are right, we should give each other rim-jobs.



hey, it makes just as much sense.

[Woozie]

Imagine if there was a simple cure for cancer, in pill form. And you were the sole patent owner of such a medication. Now imagine how much money you'd have after curing the entire world.

Now imagine...

Imagine the "cure" mutated into a virus affecting 90% of the world's population, turning into violent and almost irrational beings which feed on others' flesh. Now imagine yourself being the lone survivuor living in New York with your dog, lets name her "sam," and your ultimate goal is to find a cure...

You should become a writer in holywood. With ideas like this, you'd become legendary in no time.

[Max™]

I wonder if there is a patent for the lunar lander, now.




Also: Some Conspiracy theories I can buy, like the idea that a big part of the war in Vietnam was to bomb the hell out of rubber producing jungle with Napalm and Plant Growth Inhibitors.

Some, I just don't buy, like the moon landing, no way in hell did we put people on the moon. Clearly it was a studio set on Mars that they filmed the whole thing at, funded by the Solar Mafia.

[Saga]

I wonder if there is a patent for the lunar lander, now.




Also: Some Conspiracy theories I can buy, like the idea that a big part of the war in Vietnam was to bomb the hell out of rubber producing jungle with Napalm and Plant Growth Inhibitors.

Some, I just don't buy, like the moon landing, no way in hell did we put people on the moon. Clearly it was a studio set on Mars that they filmed the whole thing at, funded by the Solar Mafia.

dont see "lunar lander" anywhere here but I just skimmed it, patent for space shuttles by good ol' Buzz: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/68273 ... ption.html

[Charla]

Watching you guys talking about conspiracy theories is like watching a white guys addressing racism. Equally hilarious in the awkwardness.


"Well, i'm no conspiracy theorists, but look here, isn't that interesting, again i'm not a conspiracy theorists, I just wanna make that clear."


lol

Conspiracy theroies: The racism of the internet!