CryoNet #32259 - #32262

CryoNet - Mon 28 Dec 2009

    #32259: Re: CryoNet #32255 Religion as a coping mechanism [yvan Bozzonetti]
    #32260: Re: Rebranding cryonics [Mark Plus]
    #32261: Re: Rebranding cryonics [Jeff Davis]
    #32262: Re: Rebranding cryonics [David Stodolsky]

Rate This Digest: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32259%2D32262

Administrivia

To subscribe to CryoNet, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the subject line (not message _body_):
    subscribe
To unsubscribe, use the subject line:
    unsubscribe

To post a message to CryoNet, send your message to:
    [email protected]
(Note: A "Subject:" line starting the message body replaces
the "Subject:" line in the header.  This gives a second
opportunity to provide a meaningful subject line.)

Since all CryoNet messages are archived and accessible via WWW,
including search engines, make certain that your postings
reflect how you want the world to see you.

To retrieve past messages, send email to:
    [email protected]
with the message numbers in the subject line.
(Message 0003 describes the advanced syntax.)
You also can retrieve them via the CryoNet web page at URL:
    http://www.cryonet.org/

For administrative or other questions/suggestions, send email
to me at "[email protected]" with "cryonics" in the subject line.
    - Kevin Q. Brown


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32259
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2009 14:13:30 +0100
Subject: Re: CryoNet #32255 Religion as a coping mechanism
From: yvan Bozzonetti <[email protected]>

--001636456f401ee484047bb58e63

References: <[email protected]>
>
> <...>
>
> Long-term strategy should include plans for possibly moving cryonics
> patients to more receptive and/or more isolated locations. Isolated
> islands of Scandinavia, the UK, Australia, New Zealand and the Bahamas
> come to mind.
>
> Robin Helweg-Larsen
>

Moving people in liquid nitrogen has some problems of its own. For example,
what about if you spill some LN2 in a truck or a cargo airplane?
The first thing would, it seems, to have at hand some "dry cryostat" able to
keep for some days at least the LN2 temperature without liquid LN2.
Some small systems of that knid are on the market, yet no cryonics org. to
my knowlege, has any of them; the subject is not even taken into account.

Yvan Bozzonetti

--001636456f401ee484047bb58e63

 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32259

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32260
From: Mark Plus <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Rebranding cryonics
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2009 07:06:31 -0800

In Cryonet #32258, Finance Department writes:

>Actually, jetpacks work to some extent:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_pack

>Flying cars do too:  http://www.moller.com/

But these innovations wouldn't work in practice because of human factors, like intoxicated operators. We have plenty of problems now with impaired people driving automobiles. Terrorists could also load up a flying car with explosives and use it as the poor man's assassin drone. 

>Cryonics, unfortunately, has yet to be shown to work at all. It is a surprise to me if it is anywhere on the futurology scale.  Someone was too generous in assessing it.  On a scale of 0 to 1000 it must occupy the position of 0. or perhaps as a notation in the margin.

We don't know if a "singularity" can happen either, but that hasn't stopped Ray Kurzweil and some of his wealthy fans from starting a "university" to promote the idea.

I continue to wonder about the state of improgression in cryonics, given all the money some individuals have "invested" into it over the past 30 years, as well as its potentially solid financial future. Alcor, in particular, has a foreseeable income of ~ $100 million heading its way in the next few decades, assuming its current membership numbers and funding levels. Yet it doesn't seem to have much to show for the multiple millions of dollars it has taken in since I became a member in 1990. Alcor's Patient Care Trust, for example, apparently has only about $3 million in it. Some people have more than that in their retirement accounts.

Mark Plus


 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32260

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32261
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2009 11:40:59 -0700
Subject: Re: Rebranding cryonics
From: Jeff Davis <[email protected]>

On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 3:00 AM,  Finance Department
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Message #32258
> Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2009 01:33:34 -0500
> Subject: Re: Rebranding cryonics
> From: Finance Department <[email protected]>

> The answer to how to rebrand cryonics seems to be as
> simple as demonstrating
> that it works, like an iPhone does, or a Kindle....

> Cryonics, unfortunately, has yet to be shown to work at all.

Like many folks who have a degree of familiarity with cryonics,
extending even to those well versed in the details,  Finance
Department doesn't "get it."  Cryonics DOES work.  And it can be SHOWN
to work, though the circumstances surrounding the cryonics experiment
restrict this "verification" to a logical rather than material
demonstration.  That the vast majority cannot access this visionary
truth does not change the fact that it is so.

For those who see me as a "true believer" let me state bluntly for the
record, I don't do "true believer", I do SCIENCE.

I don't intend to be coy here, (or impolite, or smug, or in any other
way disrespectful toward FD).  Clearly, FD means a material
demonstration, where an appropriate test subject is frozen, stored for
some period, and then restored to life.  This is what he means when he
says, "...shown to work."  Certainly, that would convert the vast
majority of doubters.  But neither their doubt -- nor my certainty --
alters the external reality.

Which is:

(1) Freezing at LN2 temperatures maintains the the stored item in
perfect condition effectively WITHOUT TIME LIMIT.

(2) Biology demonstrates the feasibility of precise manipulation of
biological structures at the molecular level.

(3) Science/materialism has repeatedly shown that "stuff" configured
properly will function properly.  This holds for both macroscopic and
microscopic configurations.  Toasters and ribosomes both perform
properly when configured properly.

(4) The "trajectory" of technology is "one way": toward increased
human ability to manipulate material at the molecular level.

After that, it's just a numbers game.  How long till we have computers
of sufficient power to coordinate the task of repairing perhaps
trillions of instances of cellular damage?  How long until a mature
technology capable of precise repair of biological structures at the
molecular level?  How much time will it take?  Now look back at item
number one.  THE TIME AVAILABLE IS EFFECTIVELY UNLIMITED.

Do you get it now?  It's a done deal.   Cryonics already works.

Will this persuade anyone not already persuaded?  Not likely.  It's
too great a leap.  The old prejudices are too ingrained.  Except for a
few futurist geeks the new paradigm -- genetic enhancements,
cybernetic augmentation, indefinite lifespan, artificial/cybernetic
intelligences, nanotech, uploading, and the Singularity -- will be for
post-humanity, the children of tomorrow.  The children of yesterday
will adhere to old paradigm thinking,...all the way to the grave.  And
the children of today, experiencing the transition from old paradigm
to new,...

"O brave new world, that hath such people in it."

Best, Jeff Davis

  "Death is really just an engineering problem."
                        Regina Pancake

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32261

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message #32262
From: David Stodolsky <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Rebranding cryonics
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 09:59:09 +0100
References: <[email protected]>

On 27 Dec 2009, at 11:00 AM, CryoNet wrote:

> The paleofuture literature tends to treat cryonics as a product of  
> bad futurology from the mid 20th Century. How do we rebrand cryonics  
> so that people begin to associate it with the world of iPhones and  
> Kindles instead of the world of flying cars and jetpacks?

Transhumanism is already rebranding (actually repackaging) cryonics by  
including it a sequence of developments. Some of these are available  
already. The WTA also organizes local groups, etc. so there are  
ongoing activities. The results for cryonics are positive. (Partridge,  
B., Underwood, M., Lucke, J., Bartlett, H., Hall, W.D. 2009a. Ethical  
concerns in the community about technologies to extend human life  
span. American Journal of Bioethics; 9:68-76.):

They noted (2009a; 70) "The views of the theoretically sampled  
transhumanist and Christian focus groups reflected in sharp relief the  
pro and con arguments for life-extension." They comment further (p. 72):

Participants for whom religious doctrines and "the church” were  
important sources of ethical guidance were more likely to express in- 
principle opposition to life-extension research than people who  
reported having no religious beliefs. Participants who identified  
themselves as religious often expressed the view that life-extension  
was contrary to some aspects of these religious beliefs ..



The major risk of Transhumanism is that people adopt it as a type of  
religion. That is, feel that just believing will solve the problems of  
life-extension. This is not only a risk, since there are plenty of  
people who act on these types of views. The result can be doing  
nothing and just assuming the coming 'singularity' will solve all  
problems. Another is taking vitamins or other unverified treatments  
and assuming that anti-aging drugs, new organs, etc. will become  
available in time for them to avoid suspension. So, the real question  
is which of the already available methods of repackaging are effective  
in mobilizing people to work for personal and social solutions in a  
realistic way. These people will be more likely to sign up.


dss

David Stodolsky
[email protected]  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32262

----------------------------------------------------------------------

End of CryoNet Digest
*********************