X-Message-Number: 4100
Date: 28 Mar 95 01:11:37 EST
From: Paul Wakfer <>
Subject: Re: Faith in the Future

     In a previous CryoNet message, Saul Kent had written the following
strong statement:

>    My opinion that it may be possible to restore cryonics patients
>to life in the future is not based on faith in the future of science, but
>in the research advances currently being made by today's cryonics
>scientists.
>
>    I have no faith at all in future scientists, only in today's
>scientists. If they do not continue their work, there will *be* no future
>cryonics scientists. If they receive enough funding to achieve rapid
>progress in cryonics, the future could come *very* soon!
>    My message for those of you who *have* been relying on faith is
>to give it up and put your money on the line for the only pathway to
>success...scientific research to achieve suspended animation.

     In CryoNet message 4092, Ralph Merkle attempted to completely undercut
the strength and thrust of Saul's statement by writing the following:

>Perhaps a bit overstated.  Dora Kent was suspended using techniques
>that were current at the time.  Future advances in suspension
>technology will have only an indirect effect on her chances.
>Presumably "future scientists" will revive her.  And the more quickly
>we develop the necessary technology, the less time she will spend
>in suspension.

>If there is any one thing that is critical, it is to persuade a broader
>community that cryonics is reasonable and should be supported.  No
>single argument is likely to persuade everyone.  People have many
>concerns, including: technical concerns about suspension and revival;
>concerns about legal and social issues; organizational concerns;
>concerns about what the future will be like; and concerns about other
>areas that impinge (or might impinge) on the success or desirability of
>cryonics.

>We can and should address them all, though any one person might choose
>to focus on areas they feel are particularly important or for which
>they are particularly well suited.

Here is my reply to Ralph: 

1) I believe that it was unnecessary and bordering on meanness to choose
Saul's mother Dora as the example of a current cryonics patient who, based
on Ralph's understanding of Saul's statement, may have little chance of
being restored to life.
2) It is simply not true that "Future advances in suspension technology
will have only an indirect effect on her chances" or the chances of any
other patient. By having a very direct effect on the acceptance of cryonics
and the number of cryonicists, it will have a very direct effect on the
development of the technology to restore even the most poorly preserved
patients, because some poor cryo-preservations still will continue to
occur. Only if cryonics gains acceptance, will any developing technology
which can do the job, be directed to the purpose of restoring cryopreserved
patients.
3) The best way "to persuade a broader community that cryonics is
reasonable and should be supported" IS TO SHOW THEM THAT IT WORKS!
4) When cryonics is still a completely unproven process, it is easy enough
for the molders of social acceptance - scientists, media, and government -
to scoff at the idea. When cryonics has been shown to work, these same
groups will no longer be able to scoff, nor will they personally even want
to. Instead, they will all be rushing to embrace the idea and sign
themselves up.
5) Yes, "People have many concerns, including: technical concerns about
suspension and revival; concerns about legal and social issues;
organizational concerns; concerns about what the future will be like;"
etc., however, *a cryonics which works* will in one fell swoop eliminate
them all. It is easy to "be happy to end it when my time has come" when you
don't believe there is an alternative. Once cryonics works, it will be
impossible to even hold such a thought.

     In my opinion, Ralph's reply shows that his constant rebuking of any
suggestion that he does not fully support research to greatly reduce and to
eventually remove any damage caused during cryopreservation can no longer
be taken seriously.

*****************************************************************
Paul Wakfer, 1220 E. Washington St. #24, Colton, CA 92324, USA
             238 Davenport Rd. #240, Toronto, ON M5R 1J6, CANADA
  Pager: 800-805-2870  Fax: 909-987-7253
*****************************************************************

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4100