There are more than two competing hypotheses in the dissident movement. Every scientifically literate dissident is painfully aware of Peter Duesberg's long-standing claim that "HIV" is a "harmless passenger virus". Of course, his theory has been rebutted so often and so thoroughly that it has come to resemble a proverbial party guest who has stayed way too long after the party has ended. However, there is one more completely unnecessary and completely WRONG retroviral-centered theory which has been around for a few years and has at least a few obviously short-sighted and anti-scientific admirers within the AIDS dissident community.
The Perth Group have issued yet another rebuttal to all of these retrovirus-theory partisans in which the Perth Group briefly review the work they've published on exogenous retroviruses. The main thrust of the Perth Group's latest document is, however, yet another rebuttal which unfortunately still needs to be stated-of the thoroughly embarrassing, completely unnecessary and unfounded hypothesis that "HIV" is an endogenous retrovirus and that ERVs are involved in the pathogenesis of "AIDS".
The Perth Group's article is available at the following link:http://www.tig.org.za/PG.Response_to_Martin_Barnes.pdf
Sometimes I wonder if some dissidents who oppose Duesberg have an "anyone but the Perth Group" mentality?? Why else would said dissidents feel the need to support these embarrassing, unnecessary and completely stupid tertiary hypotheses???