X-Message-Number: 12840 From: Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 07:15:53 EST Subject: A need for an open discussion Recently, CryoNet wrote (Message #12796): >As we remain a forum for public expression, >I will continue to point this out (time permitting) when I see "pessimism" expressed as >fact. Pessimism AND optimism are BOTH only beliefs. However, pessimism >can be >deadly. Optimism can save lives. And > Second, how can we know we have "perfected" cryonics before we are reviving >people? It is highly probable that nanotech will be required to do this and >this then justifies that interest, IMHO. But further, it may prove to be >the case that the ice crystal problem may prove to be unimportant later. >Again, we don't know. We can't know... yet. I disagree. I believe that current procedures DO cause *irreversible* information loss, which NO technology will ever be able to overcome. Why? Because, as Mike Darwin and other people from 21CM repeatedly stated, the magnitude of the destruction is too great. This is what one researcher said : > Most cryonicists would agree that cremation destroys identity >permanently for all practical purposes. Even nanotechnology would not >be sufficient to recover a cremated individual. What if, instead of >burning from the outside-in, the brain burned inside-out, at a million >points spread randomly throughout the brain? Imagine taking a blowtorch >to the Mona Lisa at random points until only 10-20% of the original >surface area of the painting remains. You can still tell it's a >painting. You might even be able to tell that it's a painting of a >woman. But assuming that you have no prior photos of the painting, how >much of the original painting could you recover? At what cost? In what >time frame? Applying current cryonics techniques is like taking a micro-blowtorch >to the brain at a million different points. Please note that it were such long-time cryonics activists like Darwin e.a. who changed their opinion on the probability of success with current methods. And of course they know about nanotechnology. I also want to repeat that even successful brain vitrification will not completely prove that cryonics will work. There still will be *huge* amount of work after revival. Remember, all we will have after revival would be aged and likely diseased brain! Currently, we can have only vague speculations on what will be possible to do with it. Everyone entitled to his own opinion. So I think that people reading this forum should know facts from different prospective. And IMHO, current cryonic procedure amounts to little more than a high-tech funeral. Alex Berg Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12840