X-Message-Number: 28187
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 06:38:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: human screener <>

Subject: Re: Times (UK) article-- DNA screen-- paradox---anthony--ejay--writing 
style

Mainthread Backtrack link:
[8] http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=28182
	On the other hand, the techniques Anthony cites
actually do support retroactive annihalation in a
general way, albeit not specifically personal
annihalation-- but even that depends on how far we
take it. (Anthony-- take note). For example, if the
entire human race had decided to practice abstinance a
thousand years ago, that definitely would have
precluded all our existences. Of course, if that had
happened, there would be noone here today to support
complete abstinance. To the extent that that is true,
we should be a bit more concerned about supporting
abstinance too strongly-- something Anthony didn't
express regard for.[7]
	Ejay Hire then jumped in with a relevent funny line
for a T-shirt related to all of this.  Now that I'm
safe, I'm pro-choice .[9] This phrase mocks the
pro-choice (pro-abortion,
pro-zygote-filter-and-discard argument) by being up
front about the hypocrisy involved in supporting a
technology which could very well have been used to
prevent the existence of the t-shirt wearer. Another
version of the T-shirt might read  Now that I'm here,
I support total abstinance for the human race . 
	Ejay's point is right on although, again, my own
paradox was a bit more pointed in that it involved
personal DNA-specificity. We can know, for certain,
whether our personal defective DNA strand was
blacklisted by the fertility lab or not. My t-shirt
would thus read   Now that I'm safe, I'm
pro- DNA-Error-Zygote Destruction using Guys and St.
Thomas' Test Protocol, which protocol probably
includes DNA strands that I, myself, have . My paradox
arises from the realization that it doesn't really
make sense for someone to object to the procreation of
a human being with traits like himself if he's doing
fairly okay. 
	On the other hand-- if the control of the elimination
of zygotes-like-him were put into Mark's hands, maybe
his own genetic traits would, in some sort of long
term macabre way, act to wipe it's own kind off the
face of the earth through natural de-selection! Mark
might be part of a human gene-pool that is trying to
eliminate itself! Therefore, what I've discovered
isn't a paradox but rather a self-selecting human
gene-sequence that is attempting to stop itself from
being selected for genetic immortality-- a sort of
suicidal gene-sequence on a larger scale than the
death-gene-sequence we all individually have. This is
the only way that Mark's support of the lab's protocol
makes sense-- and it effectively resolves the paradox!

	I'm now done. That was some cognitive trip. And look!
The reader can refer backwards through the Cryonet
archive via my Backtrack link at the top. And all
associated posts are footnoted! This newsgroup writing
style would make Cryonet a valuable tool again if used
by more Cryonet contributors. How about you? The rule
would be-- if you start a new idea, take care of the
thread by summarizing it occasionally for the newest
readers. Always post one backtrack link at the top.
Whenever you refer to another post, insert a bracketed
number and list the linked footnote at the bottom.
Updated summaries can be backlinked to the previous
summary so individual posts don't get too big. I think
Cryonet is still the first place people go for
cryonics news updates but it's fallen through the
technological cracks being outshone by threaded forums
and blogs. 
	With this new improved writing style, it could
potentially gain dominance once again in cryonics
publishing. And note the subject line-- it uses a
single keyword or two, occasionally updated to
indicate the general direction of the thread. That's
important too. Anyway, study the method I invented and
try it sometime. The key feature we're trying to dump
is the annoying cut and paste method where people try
to respond to every point someone makes in a post that
becomes a mess. The initiator of the thread should
always consider doing a running summary with backtrack
links if he's considerate of other readers. 
	I realize the liklihood of this method being copied
is pretty tiny but I do believe that the process of
 monkey see monkey do  works. As humans go, I suspect
there could be a super-monkey or two out there. Maybe
not. This officially ends this thread-- and since I
initiated the idea (inspired by Mark's original
post)-- I would officially end it. That's another
rule. If you start a thread, you need to wrap it up
and not respond to any further comments. I'm now done
because I think I resolved the paradox that was
bothering me good enough for now.  

[7] http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=28180
[8] http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=28182
[9] http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/dsp.cgi?msg=28183 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=28187