hal@finney.org wrote:
> We see from this how far cryonics remains from the mainstream.
Blame cryonicists for that, at least partly.
Sure, one needs an inkling in half a dozen of more or less
obscure sciences and branches of technology to understand
the problem set thoroughly, and most people show criticality
in dynamics of relations to a given subject (sheeple ignore
or vilify new subjects until those standing high in the social
hierarchy adopt them, regardless of subject's actual utility),
but cryonics seems to draw rather strange people. Anecdotally,
and not so anecdotally.
Maybe this strangeness correlates with the ability to see the finity
of your worldline in a not positively biased or even agnosiastic
way, maybe not. In any case (aye, here's the plug) we need
studies as to what happens (ultra)structurally during vitrification.
Less cargo cult, more science. 'nuff said.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:38 MDT