Ted Williams a baseball legend died friday july 5th. Following his death an Alcor rapid response team began freezing his body. Later his remains were flown to Alcor's facility in Scottsdale AZ. Following Ted Williams suspension, his disinherited and ostracised daughter voiced an outrage at her fathers suspension.
There is supposedly a will which states Ted Williams dying his wish is to be cremated and have his ashes spread over the everglades. There is no evidence to corroborate that a will exists stating such.
My personal knowledge of Alcor and their application process, being cryogenically frozen is not something that someone can do to your body after you have died. The process takes anywhere from 6 months to a year or more. Several things happen in order to have oneself as a member: 1. An applicant must be mentally "all there" in order to further their application. 2. There are a team of lawyers that are present when doing the legalities of signing up that ensure that Alcor and the applicant can have full access to the remains. 3. An applicant must have the means to pay for the procedure, which for full body suspension is $120,000 or the head only procedure is $50,000. No they dont do payment plans. The suspension fee is usually payed with life insurance that is signed to Alcor.
There are several more steps in there however my point is made that it isnt something that can be thrown together, it takes time and Alcor just doesnt accept anyone.
My question just isnt that whether or not Ted Williams should remain suspended, but why is there such an outrage with his suspension? Furthermore, would any of you choose to be cryogenically suspended? Is it scientifically possible to be reanimated later in the future when the technology allows it?
My position is that Ted Williams cannot be unsuspended. Now this is just rhetoric until we get some real evidence to show whether or not he had other intentions with his remains. However, my first hand personal knowledge of how Alcor conducts its business and the dozen or so lawyers they have, nobody can have Ted Williams unsuspended.
The outrage people have against cryogenic suspension is either an emotive attachment to ones body through that one life is enough and a narrow view of death and how cryogenics changes that view we have had for as long as man has existed. That in fact scientifically death is not final.
Well everyones assumption is true, I would and I am going to be cryogenically frozen. So yes I have a lot invested into seeing that the Ted Williams situation plays out into Alcor's favor.
It isnt a question whether or not suspended patients be reanimated rather its a question of when. Science and technology is accelerating at an exponential rate. There is a specific science devoted not only to reanimating cryogenic patients but changing the idea of matter itself, nanotechnology. Nanotechnology utilizes very small machines that would repair damaged tissue, rendering humans as biological immortals. Immortal cell lines have already been created in labs. It is only a matter of time...
I don't want to sound stupid (which I am very good at.) But, could you please explain to me what this is? I'm not really interested in all of this technology, I think when you're dead, you should be buried or cremated... Sometimes technology can just be plain crazy.
Anyways, I'd really appreciate it if you could just sum up what this all means. Thanks!
The precise definition of death really is the implied question here. Clinically speaking, it is not uncommon for those undergoing moderate surgery (especially where the body is brought to low temperatures) to undergo what is technically death for a few minutes. I posit that our definition of 'death' is lacking, for as long as a person's consciousness remains in tact biologically they cannot be said to be deceased.
Ah, but what is consciousness? And how does the cryogenic process affect it?
For clarification - is there a difference in the treatment of brain death vs. cessation of heart/lung? And if the process takes 6 months to a year to complete - and must be done before death, when do you decide to start?
Personally I wouldn't choose to do it. My reasons are, just that - personal. However, the concept is intriguing, and both Ladon and Euphorion presented posts that lead to further questions.
I hope this can remain an intelligent and stimulating discussion.
----- If you're offering me diamonds and rust I've already paid
From what I've read in the papers, it's mainly the son who wants Williams's body frozen. On the record, he states that with medical breakthroughs being what they are, that he hopes somewhere down the line to be able to bring his father back to life. Absolutely ridiculous, in my opinion, but that is not the issue at debate. Off the record, reporters say that the son really wants the body frozen so that he can sell his father's DNA illegally. But, no matter what the circumstances are, I'm assuredly against the idea of having the dead frozen. It's indecent, and no one with respect for the dead would support such action, especially if the man's final wish was to have his ashes spread in the everglades as stated in the original post.
Well, I would not get cryogenically suspended. My chemistry teacher discussed the topic with us once. He said that the process actually kills your cells...like dry ice. You know how if you touch it, it is so cold that it burns you? He compared it to that. Personally, I think people do not want to face death and so this is a pathetic way to pretend that you can live forever. It is pure denial. But hey, if you want to be in denial and pay all that money then it is your choice to do so. No one should be outraged about it. I mean, I think it is stupid, but if it's what the guy wanted then leave it alone!
Posts: 3489 | Location: United States | Registered: 03-17-02
quote: Ah, but what is consciousness? And how does the cryogenic process affect it?
What is consciousness??? Rhon seriously keep the red herrings to a minimum please. If you are dead before you are frozen I think consciousness doesnt exist. But I dont know you tell me rhon. People die all the time and come back to life.
Posted by Darkness:
quote: From what I've read in the papers, it's mainly the son who wants Williams's body frozen.
I can tell you did not go to my link, therefore you made an uninformed decision. Regardless of what the son wanted or wants, he could not have had his father frozen all by himself, Ted Williams himself had to have signed the contract not the son!!!
Posted by Darkness:
quote: But, no matter what the circumstances are, I'm assuredly against the idea of having the dead frozen. It's indecent, and no one with respect for the dead would support such action,
So by your definition cryogenics is indecent and disrespectful, why? I fail to see how you have constructed an argument, you just blathered with no aim for anything. Next time be coherant.
Katelyn posted:
quote: My chemistry teacher discussed the topic with us once. He said that the process actually kills your cells...like dry ice.
Well I can already tell you chem teacher didnt tell the whole story. By freezing human tissue it prevents it from degenerating. It doesnt entirely prevent degeneration, however the degree of degeneration it is so miniscule it isnt worthy mentioning. So yes you are right freezing does "kill" the cells but they can be reanimated by conventional means.
Katelyn posted:
quote: Personally, I think people do not want to face death and so this is a pathetic way to pretend that you can live forever.
You are right people dont want to face death. I admit I dont like death and I would rather to not have anything to do with the fellow. So I am taking the proper means to see that I am not permenantly in his possesion for eternity.
If pathetic you mean, creating the means that man has to no longer die through a scientific means that is being driven by genious Ivy league professors and various other PH.D holding individual's that work at major bio-tech companies, than yes it is pathetic. I would love to see you walk into an Alcor board meeting and say to all of those doctors, physicists, mathematicians, and writers, "Thats a pathetic way to live forever." I dont know about anyone else, but I would laugh.
quote: It is pure denial.
Denying that its an assured mathematical probability that man will have the ability to no longer die, ok more uneducated rhetoric.
Allright, please do not post if you dont have an understanding of what cryogenics and nanotechnology are. I dont want this thread flooded with idiotic posts of less than human intelligence. And please actually make arguments, rhetoric and red herrings dont mean crap.
I shall come again! -Faustus
"I don't know why we are here, but I'm pretty sure that it is not in order to enjoy ourselves." - Ludwig Wittgenstein
"Happiness is the perpetual possession of being well deceived." - Jonathan Swift
[This message was edited by Ladon on 07-11-02 at 04:47 PM.]
[This message was edited by Ladon on 07-11-02 at 04:51 PM.]
Posts: 3788 | Location: California then Vermont | Registered: 09-13-01
And I see that you, Landon, while probably the most knowledgable person on cryogenics in this debate thus far, obviously knows little about the Ted Williams side of the issue. It is a fact that it is Williams's son vs. the daughter for what will happen to his corpse, which has resulted in a twisted family feud. "Williams' estate reportedly will ask a judge to decide whether Williams' body should be cremated, as his daughter wants, or whether it should be frozen, as his son apparently wants"(Morrissey, The Chicago Tribune, July 10, 2002) THIS MEANS IT IS STILL OBVIOUSLY AN ISSUE!!! And I'm quite certain that Alcor is not the end all be all of cryogenic freezing, there are other ways to go about it, as Williams's son apparently hopes. Secondly, as to the decency of it all, I can understand being alive when you're frozen, in hopes of a cure. In fact, I think it takes a lot of guts. But after your dead, then it turns nasty. I mean, imagine taking your favorite realative and having them stuffed and propped in your living room, it's practically the same thing. When people visit their deceased family members they want to imagine their souls happily prancing in heaven. They don't want to see the actual corpse, no matter how well perserved. That's just unnerving. Was that coherent enough for you?
My comment on consciousness was in direct response to Euphorion's posting. Euphorion said: I posit that our definition of 'death' is lacking, for as long as a person's consciousness remains in tact biologically they cannot be said to be deceased.
My question was for an explanation of consciousness - are we talking minimal brain wave activity or are we talking sensation and comprehension of the world around you? And how does the cryogenic process effects it. If you are dead before you are frozen, does that mean your consciousness cannot be reanimated? If you go through the procedure before death actually occurs, and thus get put into an extended sleep/coma type state, how does the process affect the brain cells and the consciousness, and what is the active (non-dead - ergo conscious) brain doing during those years?
How also is the consciousness affected in the 'head only' procedure?
I don't think these are red herrings or rhetoric, but questions that need to be considered before one can make an informed decision on the matter at hand (or at head).
----- If you're offering me diamonds and rust I've already paid
Just read your diatribe in which you picked apart everyone's arguments, in the true spirit of our old friend, Prof. You ostensibly forgot the debate topic.
Now. You. Write a paragraph without split infinitives and without dangling participles. Then even you may be coherent.
I happen to think Rhon has an interesting point regarding consiousness. Some may call the consiousness a soul. What happens to your thoughts, memories, experiences? I believe that the consiousness is an entity independent of the body. Now, assuming we can revive the body, whose soul do you think inhabits it once it is revived?
As a believer in heaven and the Biblical principal that we are appointed once to die, I see no reason to return. As long as my soul is in heaven, I don't want my body drifting around here on earth with G-d knows whose soul directing its actions! I know you can't take it with you, but if Ted Williams' jersey is so sacred that no-one else can wear it, I think my body deserves at least the same consideration.
GBY, Perlita
"If you can go through life without experiencing pain, you probably haven't been born yet." -Neil Simon
A merry heart doeth good like a medicine -Proverbs 17:22 (a)
Posts: 100 | Location: Florida, United States | Registered: 04-08-02
quote: What happens to your thoughts, memories, experiences? I believe that the consiousness is an entity independent of the body. Now, assuming we can revive the body, whose soul do you think inhabits it once it is revived?
Phineas Gage, need I say more? Or how about I ablate your prefrontal cortex and see if you can say anything besides, "Uhhhhhhhhhh".
So you are saying consciousness is independent of the body? Ok, prove it. You are asking me to accept that there is a metaphysical aspect of a human being, ok well youve got to prove this. Also by saying that consciousness is a seperate part of the human body you are going against modern psychology. Yes thats right you are saying that the premise held by thousands of PHD psychologists that has proven itself for several hundred years through observation and analysis is complete bullshit and somehow never existed in the first place. So now that modern psychology has to change since youve given new insight to the field am I invited to your Nobel Prize ceremony? Or wait Im getting ahead of myself, before this happens the current greater body of psychologists might want to see your bibliography and perhaps your Doctoral dissertation and retest your large body of research into this new finding that philosphy has been dealing with and dealt with oh about 3000 years ago? Want a cookie?
But since it has nothing to do with the debate please lets prevent it from going on and on. Unless you want to turn this into a science vs religion debate but I was hoping to keep it civil.
Ok rhon, I will deal with you.
quote:are we talking minimal brain wave activity or are we talking sensation and comprehension of the world around you?
Consciousness in regards to brain activity. Conscious being awake, unconscious not being awake. I thought psychology has dealt with consciousness? Perhaps Im wrong and my Professor and text book and all the greater body of psychologists are also wrong, like perlita has stated.
quote: And how does the cryogenic process effects it. If you are dead before you are frozen, does that mean your consciousness cannot be reanimated?
Rhon Im sure you are familiar with anesthesia and open heart surgery? Technically while under anesthesia you are consciously dead. There is no sensory input or introspective thought. In open heart surgery, the heart is stopped and the brain is iced, the person by some definition is dead, no sensory input or introspective thought. The same can be applied to sleeping. So freezing the brain has no different effect, its just storing somebody long term in a similar state as 4th stage sleep.
quote: If you go through the procedure before death actually occurs, and thus get put into an extended sleep/coma type state, how does the process affect the brain cells and the consciousness, and what is the active (non-dead - ergo conscious) brain doing during those years?
Things dont move at extremely low temperatures, so conscious thought is impossible. Action potenial of neurons cannot happen because the low temperature slows things down. Its the same principle as storing a steak in the freezer compared to the fridge or in a shoe box burried in your garden.
quote: How also is the consciousness affected in the 'head only' procedure?
Well its affected only by that the procedure is better than a whole body suspension. Having only the head allows for a more controlled freezing process decreasing crystalization damage. Not to mention its cheaper.
Katelyn:
quote: Just point out to me an example of one of the people who were successfully brought back and I will agree with you completely.
Today we lack the technology to do such, however it does not mean that it wont happen, as Ive said its a question of time. Also it may take longer than your life span to develope this technology, so it would benefit you to be frozen now as to wait the chance of being reanimated as to if you dont because they cant reanimate bone back into conscious human beings. Should we stop researching a cure for AIDS just because the drugs being researched havent yielded a cure? How about those who were against the Wright brothers, imagine the world without aviation? Are you going to go back it time to tell Bernoulli that his work is useless?
Darkness:
quote: Landon
Its Ladon, not Landon. There is a big difference.
quote: And I'm quite certain that Alcor is not the end all be all of cryogenic freezing, there are other ways to go about it, as Williams's son apparently hopes.
True Alcor is not the only cryogenic orginization out there. However Alcor has the largest membership and has quite a few important members; Eric Drexler PhD (MIT), Marvin Minsky PhD (Harvard, Princeton), Ralph Merkle PhD (Stanford)...the list goes on.
quote: "Williams' estate reportedly will ask a judge to decide whether Williams' body should be cremated, as his daughter wants, or whether it should be frozen, as his son apparently wants"(Morrissey, The Chicago Tribune, July 10, 2002) THIS MEANS IT IS STILL OBVIOUSLY AN ISSUE!!!
True it may be still disputed by his disenfranchised daughter, but Alcor has an impressive lawyer base and I explained Alcors membership process and there is no basis to conclude that in fact he has a will and it states that his wishes were to be cremated. Until, the will surfaces we must assume that it doesnt exist. Also the brother would have taken care of that will and Alcor wouldnt have accepted him with such a will. So technically its still not an issue. Until you can prove otherwise, zip it.
"I don't know why we are here, but I'm pretty sure that it is not in order to enjoy ourselves." - Ludwig Wittgenstein
"Happiness is the perpetual possession of being well deceived." - Jonathan Swift
Posts: 3788 | Location: California then Vermont | Registered: 09-13-01
Unlike you, I do not pretend to know everything about cryogenic freezing. So if I was incorrect with what my chemistry teacher said, I take it back. But I do not take back everything...
1) Cryogenic freezing IS the denial of death. If you're alive and sick, and this actually works, and you want to come back when there is a cure for you, fine, great, do it. But if you are already dead, your dead body is not coming back. Scientists, I'm sure, will prolong human life to extrordinary lengths...but they will not cure death. It is part of nature, you are born and you die. If you want to be in denial, I feel sorry for you, but you're not coming back. As I am not in denial and don't have thousands to waste, I think I'll settle for a nice earth burial.
2) I do not believe in cryogenic freezing. And your reasoning has done absolutely nothing to change my stance. However, I am all for the search for a cure for AIDS. There is a big difference between dying people wanting a chance at life and frozen dead bodies waiting around. And when it comes to such USEFUL things as aviation, I am all for it. And I didn't know I had a time machine, but thank you ever so much for the suggestion.
3)If we said "zip it" every time we disagreed with someone, these would be very pathetic debates.
Posts: 3489 | Location: United States | Registered: 03-17-02
Ummm, last time I checked we were on a debate forum and, forgive me if I'm misunderstanding something, but I thought we were actually allowed to debate points! But now moving on to my actual rebuttal. . . Where in any point of my earlier debates did I imply that Alcor was incapable of cryogenic freezing? I simply stated that there were other places that Williams's son could go if the court rules in his favor, a point you have now agreed upon. I certainly didn't want a list of Alcor member's credientials. . . Next, I'm not even going to discuss the point of whether or not the corpse is an issue. To me, it would seem that lawyers, two feuding siblings, a judge, and an enraged American population would constitute something being an issue. But hey, since Alcor says it's not, then obviously we're all a little misguided Finally, the spelling error was a typing error. That point I will graciously concede.
quote: 1) Cryogenic freezing IS the denial of death. If you're alive and sick, and this actually works, and you want to come back when there is a cure for you, fine, great, do it. But if you are already dead, your dead body is not coming back.
I thought I had already taken care of this. And Faustus served to beat it in with his anesthesia example. As long as the information contained in the cells of the brain remains intact, it is possible to reanimate someone. We see this in anesthesia, hypothermia cases, etc. If cell damage incured by the process of death/vitrification can be repaired via nanotech, then that extends the power of cryonics even further. So you are right, a *dead* body will not come back, provided by "dead" you mean "decomposed"
"denial" - refusal to recognize something that is. How about we try *amelioration* of death instead.
quote: 2) I do not believe in cryogenic freezing. And your reasoning has done absolutely nothing to change my stance. However, I am all for the search for a cure for AIDS. There is a big difference between dying people wanting a chance at life and frozen dead bodies waiting around. And when it comes to such USEFUL things as aviation, I am all for it. And I didn't know I had a time machine, but thank you ever so much for the suggestion.
Disease - An alteration in the state of the body or of some of its organs, interrupting or disturbing the performance of the vital functions, and causing or threatening pain and weakness; malady; affection; illness; sickness; disorder.
Aging is a Disease... No different from AIDS. Now, death can be broken down into 3 categories; 1) Environmental Causes 2) Acquired diseases/disorders 3) Predetermined diseases/disorders
We really cannot say that there is a "natural" lifespan. in 1900 i will have you note, the life expectancy of the average american was 49. Today it is around 72. Ergo, we cannot establish ANY qualifier to suggest that a human should live for X years, vs. Y years... Why cannot someone live for Lim X->Infinity Years?
I posit that for the same reason we fight AIDS (a member of group 2), we should also fight aging (its parent class). This is not a common meme-complex for the average person, though perhaps the connection hasnt been made to its logical conclusion -- Immortality.
"I do not believe in cryogenic freezing" Is that supposed to be an argument? I fail to see how your lack of understanding of the scientific basis for this hypothesis has to do with its validity. The point ladon was making about aviation was that the general populus laughed and guffawed at the idea of flight - same as with space travel, organ transplants, copernican astronomy, nanotechnology, personal computers, supersonic flight, etc.
Darkness Becoming, For the Ted Williams case, Alcor has a specific provision in their contract which states that any satements in the will contradicting "the aims and interests of cryonics" will invalidate any agreement held with Alcor. So this case will break down as such: either the will will say Williams wanted to be cremated, or it wont. Fin. No touchy feely humanist crap from his white trash daughter.
As long as the information contained in the cells of the brain remains intact, it is possible to reanimate someone. We see this in anesthesia, hypothermia cases, etc.
I believe that when dealingwith anesthesia and hypothermia, there is a law of diminishing returns. So if the longer one suffers from anesthesia, or is put into a 'death' state in full anesthesia, the more chance there is for permanent brain damage.
Now, with anesthesia we're talking hours (surgical situations) or a few days (in the case of a head injury, where the doctors often medically place the victim in a comatose state so as to limit the stress to the brain). With hypothermia, again, usually a matter of hours, at the most.
You are suggesting being put into such a situation for an unknown number of years. In my feeble opinion, you propose gambling on a life of severe brain damage once reanimated.
And you still haven't answered my question, regarding the brain activity during the frozen phase. Comatose patients have been known to hear and experience (albeit in a limited manner) that which goes on around them. People who have 'died' for a moment or two and then return describe the white light, the out of body experience - and observing what is going on in the room. While your brains are certainly evolved enough to keep you occupied for a few hours with no other stimulation, what will you do if during those long years there is still some consciousness of your surroundings? (I'm working in the scenario in which you choose to be cryogeneticaly preserved before your actually die.)
Have any humans been frozen and then reanimated after an extended period of time? Talk to that daring soul upon his/her awakening - and again a year later and several years after that - and watch his/her physical condition during that same time period. THEN and only then can you make an informed decision.
Without turning this into a religious debate, I find it interesting that two young men who refuse to accept words written thousands of years ago that have no other support or verification, are willing to accept the words of marketing professionals selling a service, that also has no verifiable results. You can not touch or speak to or experience the end result of cryogenics. Perhaps the man from Alcor is nothing but a long haired anthropomorphic sandal salesman.
----- If you're offering me diamonds and rust I've already paid
1)Yes, I said that A DEAD BODY IS NOT COMING BACK. Where was the argument?
2)Yes, again, as I already stated, scientists will be able to lengthen human life to incredible years some day, I am sure. But as I said before, death is not preventable. Yeah, 40 or so years was considered long at one point. Now we're at around 80. That's longer, no doubt. But you're suggesting forever. How long will that take to reach, exactly? Your popsicle of a body will be way beyond the thawing point by then. I don't think that point will ever be reached, though. Death is inevitable.
3)This is why we fight AIDS and not age. Let's say you can live forever. Is that even really good? Major overpopulation would occur, and we'd die out from starvation and lack of shelter as opposed to old age. Nature gave us death for a reason-nature, not God, I'm not making this religious-it serves a purpose. Even if it were successful, cryogenic freezing would backfire on you. AIDS research gives a person a normal lifespan. Immortality would in the end shorten it once more.
4)Allow me to clarify what I meant by I did not believe in cryogenic freezing. That was my belief, my opinion. I understand full well what you claim will happen after cryogenic freezing. I just happen to think that it's a ridiculously stupid idea. To stick a dead, decomposing body...nevermind, this is like beating a dead horse...ha, course, if we just freeze him...
Posts: 3489 | Location: United States | Registered: 03-17-02
quote: Now, with anesthesia we're talking hours (surgical situations) or a few days (in the case of a head injury, where the doctors often medically place the victim in a comatose state so as to limit the stress to the brain). With hypothermia, again, usually a matter of hours, at the most.
You are suggesting being put into such a situation for an unknown number of years. In my feeble opinion, you propose gambling on a life of severe brain damage once reanimated.
Again, this can be solved with vitrification. Cell activity at the temperatures we're talking about in anesthesia/hypothermia cases are very high. This means that cell activity will be significant, and degredation will occur due to lack of oxygen travelling to the brain (as the heart is stopped). In a vitrification, the body temperature of the suspendee is lower to a point where cell activity and degredation is practically non-existant. Again, the tired metaphor: store a rib-eye in the fridge and it lasts 10 days. Store it in the freezer in a vacuum cealed container and it lasts 5 years. I am a biology major you know.
quote: And you still haven't answered my question, regarding the brain activity during the frozen phase. Comatose patients have been known to hear and experience (albeit in a limited manner) that which goes on around them. People who have 'died' for a moment or two and then return describe the white light, the out of body experience - and observing what is going on in the room. While your brains are certainly evolved enough to keep you occupied for a few hours with no other stimulation, what will you do if during those long years there is still some consciousness of your surroundings?
Again, cell activity is non-existant at the temperatures alcor uses to store its patients. In one early (1966) experiment descibed on the alcor website, cat brains were perfused with glycerol at 10 C during a slow freezing process, which took them to the temperature of -20 C and kept them there for 43-205 days. The experiment reads:
[the brains] regained normal histology, vigorous unit (individual cell) activity in the cerebral cortex, hypothalamus, and cerebellar cortex, and strong if somewhat slowed EEG activity (8) after very slow thawing.
"it is clear that no other organ would be capable of the same degree of activity after such prolonged storage at such a high subfreezing temperature. Second, Suda et al. made no attempt to supplement their perfusion fluid (diluted cat blood) with dextrose, which must have become depleted fairly rapidly, worsening the EEG results. Third, Suda and colleagues did not wash the glycerol from the brain carefully, and this may have caused injury during brain reperfusion. Fourth, the presence of EEG activity implies preservation of long-range neural connections and synaptic transmission, and unit activity indicates preservation of cell membrane integrity, energy metabolism, and sodium and potassium pumping capability. "
An older experiment, yes. But one that shows the viability of the brain to undergo the vitrification process. This initial research was followed by a significant degree of recent work which you can find on the link above. It proves quite completely that brain tissue can be restored to its essential functionality even without a mature nanotechnology (see: http://www.merkle.com/cryo/techFeas.html ). I believe that this should satisfy your query about tissue durability in -90 C environments (Note that tissue will degrade in -20 C envrionments over long periods, but as I've said, cell degredation does not noticably happen at -90 C).
Obviously, EEG activity does not occur where cell activity is "frozen" (sorry about the pun). First and formost, if you are experiencing dream activity during anesthesia the anestesiologist is not doing his job right! the person under anesthesia should be consciously dead -- it is quite common knowledge that comatose victims and people under anesthesia have no introspective capabilities (including dreaming). If they experience a dream, it is either going under or coming out.
quote:Have any humans been frozen and then reanimated after an extended period of time? Talk to that daring soul upon his/her awakening - and again a year later and several years after that - and watch his/her physical condition during that same time period. THEN and only then can you make an informed decision.
You cannot by definition completely reject a hypothesis solely on the basis that it is not a proven fact! This is what makes it a hypothesis. In the words of Merkle ( http://www.merkle.com/ ), Cryonics is undergoing clinical trials right now. I can give you a reliable answer to its viability in 100 years. So, would you rather be in the control group or the experimental group?
quote: i find it interesting that two young men who refuse to accept words written thousands of years ago that have no other support or verification, are willing to accept the words of marketing professionals selling a service, that also has no verifiable results
I find it interesting how someone such as yourself DOES accept such a nafarius tome of half barbarian history and half fairytales. But without further divergence into religion... I would point out that you do not recognize the majority of religiously bent ancient writings, so your insistant favoritism vs. my refusal to ackknowledge is really just the pot calling the kettle black.
I would also point out that there is substantial evidence to suggest cryonics is viable. I have provided what is, in my opinion, a reasonable slice of it here for you to browse. So taking the most advanced methods of freezing the steak may not keep it to its peak rich flavor 150 years down the line, but I wouldnt bet on it surviving very well in a shoe box buried in the garden! Its a matter of choices, and right now, cryonics provides a unique possibility -- though NOT a promise.
PS. Alcor is non-profit, and I think the people working their don't stick around for the ant's share they get from the shoe-string budget Alcor runs on. The place is not run by marketeers looking to take the money of the foolish. Legally, the money not used to suspend a patient is put towards the patient care trust (I forget the specific proportions) which can only be used towards activities directly related to reviving that patient. The Alcor board is composed of very prominent scientists (youd know them if kept up on science news), including (as Ladon mentioned) Dr. Marvin Minsky, Dr. Ralph Merkle, Dr. Michael West, Dr. Eric Drexler, etc. Somehow I doubt these are the types that can be brought into an unscientific ruse to steal money from the dead.
"Outside of the proven impossible, there probably can be found no better example of the speculative tendency carrying man to the verge of the chimerical than in his attempts to imitate the birds, or no field where so much inventive seed has been sown with so little return as in the attempts of man to fly successfully through the air. Never, it would seem, has the human mind so persistently evaded the issue, begged the questions and, 'wrangling resolutely with the facts', insisted upon dreams being accepted as actual performance, as when there has been proclaimed time and again the proximate and perfect utility of the balloon or of the flying machine." Source: Melville, Rear Admiral George W. The Engineer and the Problem of Aerial Navigation. North American Review, December 1901. pp. 820, 825, 830-831.
"The abolishment of pain in surgery is a chimera. It is absurd to go on seeking it today. 'Knife' and 'pain' are two words in surgery that must forever be associated in the consciousness of the patient. To this compulsory combination we shall have to adjust ourselves."
Source: Gumpert, Martin. Trail-Blazers of Science. New York, Funk and Wagnalls Company, 1936. p. 232.
Okay one more time I will explain it: I want Williams to be created, the thought of freezing a baseball legend and war hero doesn't appeal to me whatsoever. I HOPE that Alcor and other freezing companies won't take him. But I was simply pointing out, in an earilier debate, that if the estate rules in favor of the son(weirder things have happened), there are other agencies that will take him whose memberships aren't so stingy.
quote: 1)Yes, I said that A DEAD BODY IS NOT COMING BACK. Where was the argument?
Euphorion already took care of this. If by a dead body, you mean someone who's brain is irreperably damaged -- then yes, they will not come back. On the other hand, as long as a "dead" person's brain is in tact then it is *possible* for them to be restored to function.
FIN. No buts!
quote:But you're suggesting forever. How long will that take to reach, exactly?
You raise a point that is very long and not all to relevant to this thread. Obviously something like the end of the universe will present an engineering problem any meta-intelligences seeking true immortality. The existence of a truly limitless energy source is not something that we can hope to predict with our current scientific knowledge. Also on a closer note, the biological shell we inhabit is undoubtedly fragile, so something like "mind uploading" will have to take place. If you REALLY want to get into it, I suggest you create a new thread.
quote: 3)This is why we fight AIDS and not age. Let's say you can live forever. Is that even really good? Major overpopulation would occur, and we'd die out from starvation and lack of shelter as opposed to old age.
So you're proposing that instead of allowing people to exist on an extended timescale, we should just condemn the elderly to death like cattle? these are human beings! you cant dictate 'natural law' as a means to validate a death sentence! Obviously if overpopulation occurs, we as a people will adjust. The affect of the longevity increase from 1900 to 2000 was hardly dramatic, why then should we condem ourselves to die unnecessarily? The universe has resources which are limitless. It is time we begin to tap them.
quote: 4)Allow me to clarify what I meant by I did not believe in cryogenic freezing. That was my belief, my opinion. I understand full well what you claim will happen after cryogenic freezing. I just happen to think that it's a ridiculously stupid idea. To stick a dead, decomposing body...nevermind, this is like beating a dead horse...ha, course, if we just freeze him...
I think euphorion delt with this well in his last post, even though i dont think he saw yours before his came up. I will summarize anyways. Cryonics IS a science. Cryonics DOES work. It is irrational to say you dont believe in cryonics, unless you wish to contradict the thousand years of O&A that brought us modern chemistry. Organs and Tissues, as well as several animals, have been successfully vitrified and revived. IT is only a matter of time before a frozen human can be repaired to full functionality...
