X-Message-Number: 29933
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Phil Ossifur <>
Subject: NANOTECH-- failure-- M+ view

M+ reviews the case against nanotech in his latest
blog post, pointing to the Drexler/Smalley debate and
nanoassemblers....

http://transsurvivalist.blogspot.com/

M+ wrote--

The cryonicists who emphasize the need for the best
possible cryopreservation up-front have a much better
case. Cryobiologists who can demonstrate progress in
vitrifying organs, especially the brain, have a much
better grasp on the reality of the cryonics project
than theoretical nanotechnologists.

My comment--

Seeking the best possible up-front preservation
doesn't conflict with nanotech recovery scenarios at
all in my view. I still like Drexler's view and still
think its consistent with cryonics. 

Latest CryoNet posts on nanotech
http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?sort=new&sstr=nanotech




      
      ____________________________________________________________________________________
      Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=29933

Warning: This message was filtered from the daily CryoNet digest
because the poster's reputation was too low.
It thus may need to be rated.