Dear friends of Archive Freedom,
I've read your website, and I think it's very useful to all people to know how many alternative or unorthodox scientific theories are suppresed.
A well-known case is the concerning to Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer and his German New Medicine. He's the discoverer of 5 biological-medical laws, testable and reproducible in each patient, that explain almost all diseases of medicine and his works have been scientifically verified 30 times by many medical groups.
On the internet, you get information about Dr. Hamer as "charlatan", "wonder-healer", etc. but nobody wants to test Dr. Hamer's findings. He's 24 years challenging the "scientific community" to a public test of his findings, and the response are only ad hominem attacks and character assesinations. No medical scientist dares to debunk Hamer's discoveries with a scientific test.
As an introduction to Dr. Hamer's
works, you can read the presentation of Dr.Hamer in a medicine
Also, you can read an epistemological
comparison between the German New Medicine and Conventional Medicine
Recently, Dr. Hamer invited
the President of Bavarian Cancer Society to a scientific evaluation
of his discoveries, in a open, public and honest scientific test.
But the "scientists" of Bavarian Cancer Society don't
dare to do it. You can read Dr. Hamer's letter to the President
of Bavarian Cancer Society here:
According to Hanno Beck, a famous historian of natural science of University of Bonn, said that supression of Dr. Hamer's scientific discoveries is the most cruel scientific suppresion of the 20th century.
More info about Hamer and his
In this webiste, you can read
about the University of Tubingen being responsible for the Academic
Abuse of Dr. Hamer. For example, see http://www.germannewmedicine.com/documents/penletter.html#University. Two court orders have been
sent to the University of Tubingen ordering the testing of Dr.
Hamer's discoveries. To this day, the Medical Faculty of
the University of Tubingen has refused to test Dr. Hamer's research
in spite of its legal obligation to do so and in opposition to
a court order from the administrative court Sigmaringen, Germany
(AZ 3 K 1180/86; 17.10.1986).