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