X-Message-Number: 15069
References: <>
Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 13:10:52 +0000
From: "Joseph Kehoe" <>
Subject: flat earthists

>>I agree with this. The ozone layer and global warming were those unpopular
>>theories until recently as also were asteroid impacts etc.
>Just because something is unpopular does not mean it is correct - are you
>guys members of the Flat Earth Society as well? At least we agree about
>Cryonics . .

Are you saying that there is no ozone hole or global warming? In case you 
misread my comment I am not doubting these things, quite the opposite in fact. I
am saying that these at first unpopular (early 80's for ozone depletion, 
late80's early 90's for global warming) theories have proven to be true. In the 
case of ozone depletion the cause was theorised first and for global warming the
cause may still be in doubt but the effects are not.

>> >And the kind of technology which can make cryonics work will probably be
>> >more than capable of repairing any global damage.  Look at Eric Drexler's
>> >book ENGINES OF CREATION for 1986-style projections regarding some
>> >possibilities.
>Disagreed - no amount of nano-tech is going to restore vast amounts of lost
>biodiversity and ecologically complex systems.

I accept your slap on the wrist over this.  Technology progress is used as an 
excuse for continuing our current bad practices by some people.  While nano 
would be able to repair global damage we would still be bereft of many species 
of plant and animal and many ecosystems.
As I said in an earlier post:

"If we do make it out the other side then I expect a few pointed questions from 
people about what exactly we thought we were doing in the early 21st/late 20th 

>>Everything else you write I agree with completely and absolutely. First
>>chance to get out of this gravity well I will be gone.
>>As the Ecologists say any animal that evolves for Island life IS doomed to
>>extinction -guaranteed!
>>If we stay here we will become extinct. Besides there is enough asteroid

>>material up there to build a couple a thousand earth sized ecosystems in 
>>Roll on nano
>For a start you cannot compare the whole of the planet to an island with a
>limited biota - how did we get to such large amounts of biodiversity in the
>first place? Secondly, forget about any vaguely interesting, manufactured
>asteroid ecosystem that hasn't had a huge amount of transplanted Earth
>stuff. It would take literally billions of years to evolve to something as
>nice as we have now (and are destroying at an increasing rate).  You guys
>just don't get it . . we DEPEND on a complex ecosystem for our HUMAN
>survival - why continue to stupidly damage it when we have no way of
>predicting how bad the end result will be?  Isn't it better to be extremely
>cautious? Or do you like accellerating a big, fast car up the road and over
>the cliff just because you like the feel of the wind in your hair?

The Earth is an Island, a big one on our scale but a very small one on a cosmic 
scale.  It would take a very tiny occurance to ruin it, a tiny asteroid 
(anything over 6km in diameter should do), a large solar flare, local nova etc. 
If we remain on earth we will be extinct, it may take a long time (or it may 
not) by our reckoning but only a heartbeat on the cosmic scale. Even if it just 
set us back 200 years then everyone cryonically frozen would perish!

The best way to save the local ecosystems is to move people off them!  As long 
as there are people here damage will be done.

Why do we need to evolve a replacement? nature has done the evolving for us, all
we need is a bit of an increase in our understanding of ecosystem dynamics and 
about 100 years of construction in space. What materials are available here that
are not available up there? Leave the planets as breeding grounds for new life 
- no one else is using the asteroids (that we know of)


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15069