X-Message-Number: 19281
From: 
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 00:32:08 EDT
Subject: Re: CryoNet #19263 - #19271

I am not able to take the time to respond in detail to Philip Rhoades 
ferocious rebuttal of my remarks on Bush, global warming, limits of growth, 
etc.  However, I stand by all my points.  Regarding Julian Simon, the fact 
that he was an economist has nothing to do with the facts of his arguments 
which are fully documented and, to my mind, convincing, and impressively 
presented.  I regret that he is no longer with us to defend himself.  I 
repeat that the politically correct notions of growth limits combined with 
the view that the industrial and now technological revolutions are the 
problem and not the solution are part of a world-wide intellectual mind set, 
unfortunately embraced by many of my fellow liberals, which acts as a serious 
block to acceptance of cryonics, not to mention less adventerous and less 
speculative fields such as cloning and genetic engineering without which 
there will be no significant life extension and no regeneration of our frozen 
friends.  Regarding global warming, per se, which seems to loom large in 
doomsday thinking today, I will only add these further observations.  
Worldwide temperature has gone up one degree celcius in the last 100 years.  
In the United States, the 'hot bed' of global warming for some, it has been 
1/2 degree.  In Siberia 2 degrees.  It is not adequately established that 
this amount of warming is even a bad thing!  The earth has been much warmer 
than today's average temperatures many times in the past few thousand years 
and there is a natural variability caused by non-human factors which is 
year-to-year, decade  to decade and century to century.  I gather that we 
have been on a warming trend for a much longer period than can be explained 
by human activity. My immediate source for these numbers is an American 
Broadcasting Company TVnews special which aired tonight although I think it 
was a rebroadcast.
Unlike my characterization, I do not believe in development at any cost.  
However, we have made tremendous strides, with the help of science and new 
technology, to improve air and water quality in developed countries and to 
improve our lives in general.  We will continue to do so.  It is only through 
applications of science that we can, in fact, protect and preserve species 
and even wilderness areas. 
Why is this relevant to cryonics?  I think the core belief of cryonicists is 
that we are headed toward a much brighter future in which science-based 
technologies will transform our world in very positive directions for all 
humans.  Of course, there will be ups and down and sometimes technology will 
be misdirected and science will be used in malevolent ways.  However, this is 
not the dominant trend and we will never get to our desired future by going 
back to nature.  [By the way, the urban air of 200 years ago was loaded with 
pathogens and particulates and the average life span was something like 40 
years.]  Ron Havelock.  FYI: my first doctorate was in the squishy field of 
psychology but I know my statistics and once taught that subject.  
Ultimately, we have to go where the numbers take us, like it or not.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=19281