credentials so impressive what he says isn't bunk
Ordinarily, I would agree with you, wwh. But, in this case, Duesberg's "crusade" is considered dangerous by many because it subverts the "safe sex" message. Duesberg's detractors argue that his public stridency as an "HIV-refusenik" is a huge gamble and therefore irresponsible because his science is no more conclusive than the science he impugns.

A January 2002 article in the French publication "Sciences et Avenir" acknowledges that Duesberg is providing a useful service in keeping researchers on their toes, but it also warns that Duesberg has invested so much in his crusade, he may have lost his objectivity.

Perhaps we ought to consider a further refinement on your qualifications for "bunk", wwh. Fraud, ignorance + evangelical apostasy more distinguished for its potential for public harm than for public good.

I grant it is easier to debunk Duesberg's mission than his science.