X-Message-Number: 21994 From: Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 16:00:26 EDT Subject: Re: CryoNet #21973 - #21982 In a message dated 6/15/03 2:00:56 AM, writes: << Simon and Lomberg weren't trained in petroleum geology >> Well now, Mark Plus, so is it that no one unless so trained can look at data and speak with any authority on such matters? What nonsense. Does Deffeyes speak for everyone in petroleum geology? And, for that matter, is the "Association for the Study of Peak Oil" a disinterested party? Just from the name, I doubt it. Even the oil companies have a vested interest in high oil prices and hyping future shortages along with drilling everywhere for more. The manifest fact is that the pre-tax inflation-adjusted price of oil has been dropping steadily for nearly 80 years as known reserves as well as production and consumption have been increasing. Long predicted, no peak is even yet on the horizon unless you count the infinitely riggable "models." As for the supposed "fossil" origins of petroleum, I am just a casual lay reader on the subject, but from what I have read, the hypothesis is far from proven, partly because there seems to be so much oil in so many places around the globe that it casts in doubt the notion that it could all be geologically trapped animal residue. The case for coal as a resdue of decayed plants is obvious, of course. We can argue ourselves blue on the subject of oil and other so-called "non-renewable" resources, but it should be obvious to cryonicists that if the doomsdayers are right, we are out of luck, because in the future world of scarcity and enveloping oceans that they imagine, nobody will allow funds to go into the energy-wasteful topping off of liquid nitrogen containers, let alone developing and sustaining an infrastructure to usher in the revival of anyone frozen now or in the future. Kevin Spoering, Message #21976 From: "Spoering" <> Subject: In Defense Of Mark Plus, clearly has also been convinced of the same limits hypothesis in citing with admiration THE GREAT BUST AHEAD by Daniel Arnold, and THE RETIREMENT MYTH by Craig Karpel. The market for this doomsday stuff is endless and the believers are in the millions. Notice that the "bust" is always ahead. Don't bother explaining why the world standard of living has risen substantially over the last century as the population has exploded, while the quality of life in the developed world has advanced out of all comprehension and in flat contradiction of doomsday models. A standard response of our critics is that even to imagine cryonics is an obscene luxury while other millions around the globe are starving and dying, etc. and indeed it is! They are right, it is a luxury along with a full refrigerator, air conditioned houses, a car, a second car, a jet plane ride, lap tops, cable, internet access. Where do we start, dear friends? What goes first? I respect the fact that many on this list, perhaps Mark Plus, included, are confirmed environmentalists. Indeed, on many issues, I count myself in this number, but if you think our world is headed for disaster unless we drastically limit consumption of practically every consumable item, then your views are in direct contradiction of cryonics and you probably don't belong on this list. I stand by my previous comments and strongly suggests those concerned with these issues to at least browse the contrarian references I cited. Ron Havelock President-elect, Washington Area Life Extension Society CI Member Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=21994