X-Message-Number: 19815
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 08:51:36 -0400
From: "Raphael T. Haftka" <>
Subject: Where doe cryonics fit?

We are part of a large sequence of promisers of immortality.

I was glad to see Ettinger's post on probability (see excerpt below), 
because it explains neatly why most people don't want to bother with 
cryonics. Throughout history there have been many people who promised 
immortality or extremely long life with this or that device (Calcium 
appears to be a new one based on another post from yesterday). With all of 
these proven to be bunk, there must be a high probability that any scheme 
for immortality is bunk.

Rafi Haftka

>Where does my interpretation come in? We don't depend on guesswork or on
>dogma. We find a suitable, historical sequence of experiments into which the
>present instance can fit. This could be any of many. An obvious choice might
>be claims of "paranormal" power. How many such claims have been made (a great
>many), and how many validated (none). Hence the *a priori probability* was
>extremely close to zero, and we are not even interested in the outcome. Of
>course, if the shaman could do it many times in succession, on demand, that
>would change the picture.
>Into what sequence might the cryonics question fit? One of them is on our web
>site--the sequence of technological goals and the results. Look at all the
>historical goals or projects that might be considered reasonably similar, by
>sufficiently broad criteria, and the record of successes, continuing efforts,
>failures to date, and acknowledgements of failure. Try it--you'll like it.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=19815