X-Message-Number: 10373
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 11:09:51 -0400
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: CryoNet #10367 - #10370

Hi again!

I note Ettinger's comment that he would welcome a libel suit from
Arthur Rowe. However, none has been forthcoming.

If Arthur Rowe actually subscribes to Cryonet, he has hardly made
himself visible. 

I would certainly agree with Will Dye that it is unwise to call your
opponent a liar in a debate. However so far as I know, we are not here
debating with Arthur Rowe, nor will he hear of our discussion. And yes,
I too believe there is ample reason to believe that Prof Rowe was
lying, and using his position of authority to UNJUSTLY denigrate 
cryonics. Present and past methods of suspension may or may not ever
result in revivals, but so long as prominent cryobiologists so blithely
issue lies about freezing to the public, our recruitment and so our
own ability to do research to advance our methods is severely damaged.

Many years ago, when I was first looking into cryonics, I realized quite
soon that many cryobiologists did not like the idea, and would stoop to
dishonorable methods to prevent its continuation and growth. At first
I thought they were honest, and so for a while considered establishing
a society to promote suspended animation rather than a cryonics society.
But then on looking into the issue more deeply I came to see those 
cryobiologists for what they were.

Whether future research will ever find ways to revive past suspendees is
still an open question. That is exactly why I do not want to be suspended
except at a last resort alternative to burial or cremation. Yet the lies
of authorities have done much, I believe, to prevent our growth and
even to prevent the research which will ultimately lead to that suspended
animation we'd all like to be available. 

			Best and long long life to all,

				Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10373