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