X-Message-Number: 15044 From: "George Smith" <> References: <> Subject: Re: CryoNet #15035 Why I hate the earth. Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 12:00:21 -0800 I wanted to briefly respond to some of Joseph Kehoe's statements in Message #15035 on the environment. In 1971 I took one of the first "ecology" courses offered at the University of Illinois at Chicago Circle just before graduating. In that course we were presented with "likely" scenerios which included the global death of blue green algae within 5 years and several other "end of the world real soon" suggestions. Well I'm still breathing as we approach 2001. Everything that follows is strictly my opinion. Understand that what is popular in "science" is driven by political forces (money). As many legitimate researchers who read this forum can attest, hard science is often quite distant from "popular" science. Lone wolf voices who have the integrity to adhere to the scientific method are silenced by the shouting of the rabble. (One current example is Peter Duesberg's ongoing request for ANY scientific evidence to support the AIDS-HIV myth. You see, there is much money through popular grants and political spin to continue to perpetuate non existent plagues, such as "AIDS"). In other words, if a "scientific" view is popular but not immediately demonstrable, you might as well assume it is just as likely nonsense as reality. "Save the earth" is a popular mantra. Therefore, based on the historical unconscious need of the masses to be wrong (the stock market is an excellent long term study of popular opinion buying at tops and selling at lows), I assume that the world does not need "saving". But let's suppose I'm wrong and through sheer chance the whale huggers have gotten it right and the world is facing DOOM, DOOM, DOOM! Well, if technology doesn't come up with the solutions, it's all over. (Kiss your whale good bye!). And the kind of technology which can make cryonics work will probably be more than capable of repairing any global damage. Look at Eric Drexler's book ENGINES OF CREATION for 1986-style projections regarding some possibilities. But, finally, as for me, you can KEEP the earth. MOST of this world is unpleasant for human beings if not down right deadly. Deserts, oceans, marshes, empty prairies, etc. And let's not discuss weather, please. Hot as hell, cold as hell. Tornados, hurricanes, typhoons, electrical storms. And let s not forget volcanos, earthquakes and tidal waves. The worship of "mother earth" reminds me much more of the worship of the killer goddess Kali. (What a babe!). The first moment technology opens a reasonably secure door to leaving this ugly little mudball, I'm outta here! (As an aside on the "where is ET" question, I'd submit that if he ever visited here, he'd NOT come back). Robert Heinlein once wrote something like, "The good thing about spaceflight was it let you go elsewhere". The good thing about cryonics is that it affords a second chance for those of us who might not otherwise live quite long enough to finally be able to "go elsewhere." ...such as one of those near Earth astroids. Bet such places will make very comfortable places to reside - on the INSIDE. Last night I looked out at the stars. Looks like there's a lot of real estate out there. The Planet "Dirt" (the earth) is just one more undeveloped, primitve gravity well. I'll bet there are other, better places to go (or create). The insects have ruled this planet for far too long. Let 'em keep it! Death to the mosquitos! Cryonics for us. That's my opinion. George Smith Quivis est contradictio!" - Professor Wagstaff, Huxley College, "Horsefeathers" 1932 Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15044