X-Message-Number: 4921
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 07:56:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joseph Strout <>
Subject: Re: Straight Freeze [Kent, Saul]

On Wed, 27 Sep 1995, Saul Kent wrote:

> 	The primary reason I consider his approach to be unreasonable was
> stated in my last message. It is because of the fact that NO CRYONICS
> COMPANY CURRENTLY OFFERS A STRIGHT-FREEZE OPTION, NOR TO MY KNOWLEDGE DO
> ANY COMPANIES INTEND TO OFFER IT IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE! 

Ah!  This simplifies things immensely.  There is no longer any need for
any of us to strain our brains coming up with new ideas, because if it was
a good idea, some cryonics company would already be doing it (or at least
considering it).  According to Mr. Kent, it is impossible (even
inconceivable) that someone such as Mr. Norton could come up with a good
idea that is not already under consideration by the infinitely wise
cryonics organizations.  The first criterion of a Good Idea, apparently,
is that it was conceived by someone in a position of power within a
cryonics organization.  If that's not you, then keep your smart ideas to
yourself. 

(I apologize -- I believe this is my first descent into sarcasm, but Mr. 
Kent's position is so amazingly unreasonable, I couldn't bear it.)

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
|    Joseph J. Strout           Department of Neuroscience, UCSD   |
|               http://sdcc3.ucsd.edu/~jstrout/    |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4921