X-Message-Number: 16600
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 01:37:51 -0400
From: "Stephen W. Bridge" <>
Subject: Re: On Fraud and Learning

From Steve Bridge
In reply to      Message #16582
                         Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 19:09:29 EDT
                         Subject: On Fraud and Learning

Mike Darwin makes some valuable points about the nature of fraud and how to

avoid it.  I hope everyone learns from this.  I could make several self-
defensive arguments back; but I don't intend to prolong this discussion.  
And I'm not really interested either in defending my honor or in defining
exactly what my precise level of foolishness was at this late date.  If 
everyone learns something from the conversation and avoids similar 
problems in the future, that will be fine.

However, I do want to make one thing very clear.  I AGREE with Mike 
that Fred Chamberlain was the key to exposing the fraud or incompetence 
of the Vissers, and if I said anything that appeared counter to that, I

And a brief reply to Charles Platt in his post: 

     Message #16583
     Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 13:36:11 -0400 (EDT)
     From: Charles Platt <>
     Subject: visser

>A couple other comments re Steve Bridge's post. First, if Alcor and CI had
>pursued their interest in Visser cooperatively and openly instead of
>secretly, probably the whole farce could have been avoided, and $50,000
>could have been saved. The preconception that Alcor and CI had stumbled
>upon something which must be kept confidential, and which they intended to
>protect under an EXCLUSIVE licensing arrangement, resulted in the
>organizations depriving themselves of expert advice. 

Absolutely true, Charles.  But all through the history of cryonics,
organizations have 
reacted this way in other, smaller matters and have constantly deprived
of advice by being pissed off at each other.  Or because of past angers
have ignored 
valuable advice thrust upon them without asking.  This is not true only of

If there had been some way for us all to work together by melding all of
our strengths, 
cryonics would be a lot farther along now.  I always liked the three-way
leadership of 
Carlos Mondragon, Mike Darwin, and Jerry Leaf.  They balanced each other
their arguing and tugging, bolstered in different ways by Saul Kent, Steve
Harris, Hugh 
Hixon, Paul Genteman, and at times by people like myself.   But that
trinity was also 
explosively mismatched in many ways and when Jerry went into suspension, it
collapsed.  The explosiveness might have caused that eventually, in any

I would have liked to have been the President of an organization with all
of the talents
above, plus those of Charles Platt, Dave Pizer, Fred Chamberlain, Linda
Brenda Peters, Ben Best, Paul Wakfer, Brian Wowk, Mike Riskin, Ralph
Tanya Jones, Derek Ryan, and many others.  And with the ability to consult
people like 
Bob Ettinger, Jerry White, Paul Segal, and Jim Yount.  And with the
knowledge and 
mental strength to sort out the right answer from the various conflicting
opinions sure 
to arise.  But I wasn't strong enough to do that in reality, and I don't
know anyone who is.

Yes, inclusive research is a good thing for cryonics -  and very difficult
to perform in the 
all too human egosphere that surrounds us. 

Steve Bridge

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16600