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