Emerging Viruses-Aids & Ebola - By Leanard ... - preterhuman.net

human viruses, and that the genetic structure of the AIDS virusactually looked like the viruses that appeared in animals thatwould not normally adapt themselves in humans. . . .That could have occurred spontaneously, but not by the processthat scientists have normally talked about. For instance, not bythe virus running in primates [the highest order of mammals,including man, monkeys, and lemurs] because if you look at thegenetic structure of the AIDS virus, what you find is that thecodon choices [the specific sequence of three (purine andpyrimidine) bases in the viral RNA that codes for the productionof a specific amino acid by the infected cell] included in theAIDS virus are not existent in primate genes.Therefore, to assume that they simply mutated in order to adaptthemselves into primates in the case of AIDS is vanishingly smallalthough still possible. What happened is that the virus eithermutated in cattle and sheep, and then was artificially adapted tohumans by growing in human tissue cultures, which they[virologists] do and in which they are easily manipulated in thatmanner - or the virus was actually constructed in a laboratory bygene manipulation, which was available to scientists in the early'70s although many of the techniques were not talked about untilthe mid '70s, because the biowarfare laboratories throughout theworld have always been about five to ten years ahead of otherlaboratories working on all kinds of projects.In addition, a clearer reason is, if you look at the appearance ofthe 'human retroviruses,' the fact is that there were a host of thesethings that appeared all at the same time. So, you have to explainnot only the appearance of HIV-I, but also HIV-II, HTLV-I,NTLV-II, HTLV-IV, HTLV-V, HTLV-VI, ad nauseam.And so, to say that these things all spontaneously mutated at thesame time in nature, and in the same direction, to infect humanbeings spontaneously and spread disease in worldwide epidemicproportions, in my opinion, is absurd compared to the known factthat scientists were working with exact progenitors of theseviruses in their laboratories, which we can document.The Green Monkey TheoryLEN: But what about the green monkey theory - the theory that agreen monkey bit an African or someone had sex with an ape?ROBERT: That's just nonsense. . . . Green monkeys are about thesize of chickens. So the idea of a human having sex with a femalemonkey the size of a chicken is, of course, absurd.In addition, the theory that a transmission occurred throughbiting, of course, is always said to be close to impossible. If youlook at the CDC and everybody else, they say that biting is not aneasy way to spread these diseases except in the case of thepurported green monkey which is suddenly the way it wasspread. [2]