Talk:Bill Gates

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RobSmith (Talk | contribs) at 21:48, April 20, 2020. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search
  • I think it makes sense to believe in God... doesn't mean he himself believes in God; it could be justification for not firing "irrational" believers on his payroll. Without further evidence that he himself is a believer in the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob, I'm changing the subheading. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 09:31, 18 April 2020 (EDT)

I removed the whole section and placed it here. In the context of this article, this subsection makes no sense and has broken links.

The bottomline here is, Gates thinks his own wife is crazy for believing in God, but he won't say so publicly. So he defends her beliefs and justifies tolerance by saying, "I think it make sense to believe in God", but in no way is he talking about himself. And he's tired of arguing with his own wife about it. She herself, having been raised Catholic, may think rising in society requires some outward appearance of churchgoing, while secretly being a non-believer; whereas in Gates' cultural background, a total rejection of religious values and beliefs is a sign of progress. He sounds like a badgered husband, tired of arguing with his wife about it. But nowhere does he express any personal sentiments about his own spiritual values or beliefs. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:58, 20 April 2020 (EDT)

Alleged religious views of Bill Gates

Bill Gates' January 13, 1996 Interview with Time Magazine reporter Walter Isaacson:

Isaacson: Right? Isn't there something special, perhaps even divine, about the human soul?

His face suddenly becomes expressionless, his squeaky voice turns toneless, and he folds his arms across his belly and vigorously rocks back and forth in a mannerism that has become so mimicked at Microsoft that a meeting there can resemble a round table of ecstatic rabbis. Finally, as if from an automaton, comes the answer: "I don't have any evidence on that." Rock, rock, rock. "I don't have any evidence on that."[1]

In 2014, Gates declared, "But the mystery and the beauty of the world is overwhelmingly amazing, and there's no scientific explanation of how it came about. To say that it was generated by random numbers, that does seem, you know, sort of an uncharitable view [laughs]. I think it makes sense to believe in God...”[2]

Is this what's being alluded to? [1]

We've raised our kids in a religious way; they've gone to the Catholic church that Melinda goes to and I participate in.

What a joke. The guy's as bad as any Democrat using disclaimers, "Melinda goes to and I participate in". What does that mean, "I participate in?" He gives her $20 bucks to throw in the bucket when she goes to church? or he actually shows up for functions involving his children? or he's tired of fighting with Melinda over her taking the kids to church? "It makes sense to believe in God". Nowhere does Gates claim he believes in God or is catholic. I'm removing the category, as well. This whole notion is a mockery and a hoax. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 12:02, 20 April 2020 (EDT)

This whole sections is pure garbage. It says,
Gates formerly described himself as an agnostic,[3] he recently became a Catholic[4] and his wife Melinda Gates is also a churchgoing Catholic ..."
(A) To "become a Catholic" one must be baptized Catholic. Show evidence Bill Gates was ever baptized anything. (B) the article's own source link reads,
Do you believe in God?
"I agree with people like Richard Dawkins that mankind felt the need for creation myths. Before we really began to understand disease and the weather and things like that, we sought false explanations for them.
Whoever wrote this, did you even read your source links? Is it just wishful thinking on your part? You're extrapolations are directly contradicted by your own sources. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:42, 20 April 2020 (EDT)

Any resemblance?

Technet gates.jpg
Hitler 1927.PNG

What a joke

What a joke this communist agitprop is. "Bill Gates started programming computers at age 13 (in 1968 before home computers were invented, the size of a small computer was the size of a Mack Truck, cost $1 million which his parents gave him for Christmas and he partly paid for mowing lawns).

Game Over, Mr. Bill Gates. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 12:55, 20 April 2020 (EDT)

If you were referring to my reposting the Inventor and American Inventor categories, that wasn't Commie Agitprop (at least, not that I was aware, and I generally make sure to avoid Commie Agitprop, go out of my way of showcasing the true horrors of Communist thought). Pokeria1 (talk) 14:22, 20 April 2020 (EDT)
Bill Gates is a communist and what he wants you to believe about himself is commie agitprop.
Gates started programming computers at the age of 13 in 1968 before the first microcomputer (measuring a couple of feet long) was invented. So since it was impossible to own a personal computer, who hired Gates at the age of 13 to program a computer? better yet, what company or government agency allowed a 13 year old punk to play with a million dollar piece of equipment?
Oh, and how did a college drop out escape the draft in 1973? I've had my fill with listening to 25 years of Bill Gates, Microsoft, and MSNBC fake news and communist misinformation. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:44, 20 April 2020 (EDT)
Unfortunately, those who have money, have power. This creep has plenty of both. --DavidB4 (TALK) 15:16, 20 April 2020 (EDT)
This scumbag is two days older than John Brennan and both are few weeks older than me. Meaning we all three share the same life experiences. We've all witnessed the same day-by-day events unfold over decades. We've all had our own reactions, understanding, and interpretation to those events. These punk pieces of garbage are fooling no one. RobSDe Plorabus Unum
Look, I'm not a fan of Bill Gates, either. Actually, personally, I view him as scum and would get rid of Microsoft if such didn't run the risk of making files I've made unusable (I'm really attached to my files, and if I move my files to open source, for example, I won't be able to use them anymore). However, he's never given any indication that he answered to Moscow during the Cold War, or for that matter to Beijing (though that being said, he probably IS one by 2017 at the earliest due to being inducted into that university), so no matter how much loathing I have for the man, I still need hard evidence that he's a communist. Pokeria1 (talk) 15:36, 20 April 2020 (EDT)
Okay. Help me translate Dr. Tirumalai Kamala's complete response into plain English a layman can understand. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 17:08, 20 April 2020 (EDT)
As to commie agitprop, what does the MS in MSNBC stand for? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 17:15, 20 April 2020 (EDT)
Microsoft. And for the record, I don't even WATCH MSNBC, nor do I ever plan to. Pokeria1 (talk) 17:22, 20 April 2020 (EDT)

Full text of Dr. Kamala's response:

Is it true that Bill Gates faced trial in India for illegally testing tribal children with vaccines? 3 Answers

Tirumalai Kamala, Immunologist, Ph.D., Mycobacteriology Answered December 3, 2015 No, that isn't completely accurate.

Who: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), (PATH) and Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) The BMGF funds PATH, a Seattle-based NGO and main recipient of BMGF grant money for global public health initiatives. Since 1998, BMGF has funded PATH to the tune of ~$2 billion. The ICMR is the Indian Government's primary agency tasked with conducting biomedical research.

What: A Phase V human papilloma virus (HPV) Phase V vaccine trial in Andhra Pradesh & Gujarat, India

PATH carried out a large HPV Phase V vaccine trial in India. Phase V means using approved, not test, vaccines. Certain forms of HPV are associated with cervical cancer. The vaccines in question, Gardasil from Merck and Cervarix from GlaxoSmithKline, were granted marketing approval in India in 2008 while the PATH-sponsored trial began in 2009 as a joint project with the ICMR, using donated vaccines.

  • The purpose of the trial was to generate data to support the inclusion of the HPV vaccine in India's Universal Immunization Programme (UIP).
  • Specifically recruiting from low-income rural, largely tribal, households, the trial was conducted on girls aged 10 to 14 using Gardasil in Khammam district of Andhra Pradesh (AP) state (n=13000), and using Cervarix in Vadodara in Gujarat state (n=10000).

The Problems

Public recognition of problems with this trial started with the reported death of 7 girls. This led to immediate suspension of the trial in 2010 even though it was supposed to run until 2011. Investigations showed these deaths weren't directly connected to the vaccines (see table from the initial official investigation report, 1).

However, investigations triggered by these deaths instead uncovered serious violations of the process of informed consent (see official investigation reports below from 1, see also 2). Aged 10 to 15, girls in this trial were obviously below the age of consent meaning their participation in the trial required the consent of parents/guardians. In the course of Government of India (GOI) investigations, the trial investigators 'were asked to submit 100 consent forms, chosen randomly, for both AP and Gujarat for independent verification' (1). These consent forms turned out to have several problems (see reports below from 1).

Investigations (1) revealed that

  • In Andhra Pradesh, 'Signatures of one parent were obtained on 9543 forms, thumb impression of one parent on 1948 forms and signatures of Hostel Warden/Head Master as Guardian in 2763 forms'
  • The investigators noted, 'The legality of the signing by the Hostel Warden/Head Master in Andhra Pradesh needs to be examined by an appropriate authority'.
  • In Gujarat, 'In Gujarat one parent has signed on 6217 forms, has provided thumb impression on 3944 forms and Legal guardian has signed or put thumb impression on 545 forms'.
  • As a newspaper report summarized, signature of ~2800 consent forms had instead been signed by school teachers, principals or hostel wardens, even in cases where the girls had parents (2).

The Indian Parliament's Standing Committee on Health began its investigation in April 2010 and concluded that 'safety and rights of children were highly compromised and violated' (3).

The Committee's report (3) found

  • The girls' consent was not fully informed.
  • Post-vaccination adverse events weren't adequately monitored or reported.
  • PATH and ICMR hadn't sought mandatory permission from the Drug Controller General of India (DCGI) or the Indian National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (NTAGI).
  • PATH wasn't even a registered legal entity when it began working with the ICMR.
  • DGAI culpable for dereliction of duty.

The Committee's report stated, 'PATH resorted to an element of subterfuge by calling the clinical trial as 'observational studies' or 'demonstration project' and recommended legal action against PATH (3). However, the Union Government of India decided legal action couldn't proceed based on the its assessment of the country's prevailing laws. Instead in 2014, it issued a warning letter to PATH (4).

PATH's dubious and unconvincing defense was that this wasn't a clinical trial, only an observational study of an already approved vaccine. As such, it argued that neither provision, i.e., informed consent and monitoring/reporting of post-vaccination adverse events, was necessary (5). This is patently incorrect.


  2. The Hindu, May 25, 2011. Editorial. A shockingly unethical trial
  3. Page on
  4. The Hindu, August 25, 2012. Aarti Dhar. Government warns PATH
  5. LaMontagne, D. Scott, and Jacqueline D. Sherris. "Addressing questions about the HPV vaccine project in India." Lancet Oncology 12.14 (2013): e492; Statement from PATH: cervical cancer demonstration project in India

Further Reading

  1. Kumar, S., and D. Butler. "Calls in India for legal action against US charity. Nature News [Internet]. 2013 Sep 9 [cited 2013 Oct 22]." Calls in India for legal action against US charity
  2. sSharma, Dinesh C. "Rights violation found in HPV vaccine studies in India." The Lancet Oncology 14.11 (2013): e443.

Thanks for the A2A, Shivanshu Siyanwal.