X-Message-Number: 6841
Date: 	Tue, 03 Sep 1996 19:33:48 -0700
From:  (Olaf Henny)
Subject: Cryonics: Cerdibility, Credibility and Credibility

For us involved in cryonics (in my case vicariously) it may
be  difficult to understand the scepticisms involved in the
assessment of this science by outsiders and the only
casually informed.

Let us look at a couple of men in other disciplines for a
more neutral perspective:

Copernicus, 
the discoverer of the heliocentric 'universe', I am sure was
the target of much ridicule for his theory (it was plain
there for everybody to see, that the sun circled around the
earth once every day and was chased down and passed by the
moon once every 28 days or so).  I am quite sure, that this
must have been the reason, why he published his: "On the
revolutions of the heavenly spheres (De revolutionibus
orbium coelestium, Nuremberg, 1543)" only in his last days.

Erich von Däniken,
contemporary, and therefore still much more controversial, the
author of 'Chariots Of The Gods' asks some pertinent and as
yet unanswered questions about, what he interprets as,
evidence of visits from outer space.

While it is very premature to accept his theories as
probable, any curious mind must come to the conclusion, that
they are worthy of some investigative research.  The problem
is, that von Däniken was not an archeologist (his formal
education was the equivalent of non-academic Grade 12).  

Had his questions been asked by an establishment
archeologist, there would by now be a proliferation of
working papers on the subject published.  His problem was
not the subject of his assertions, but the wrong man making
these assertions.

Our galaxy alone has somewhere between 150 and 250 billion
stars (stellar systems?) that is about 30 to 50 stellar
systems(?) for every man, woman and child on our planet.  It
is absurd to think, that we are the only intellectually
evolved race in our galaxy, let alone the universe.  Yet von
Däniken was pooh-poohed or ignored by the archeological
establishment (he was not one of *them*, how could he dare
come up with something they had not thought of or had not
had the guts to mention).

Just think, if, when the earth was formed 4.5 billion years
ago a similar planet had formed in a different star system
and had gone through a similar geological and biological
development, leading to evolvement of a sapient race, as
earth, but only in 1% less time, we would have now a race,
which is 45 million years ahead of us in terms of scientific
development [compared to our twenty thousand years since
settlement and development of earliest agriculture, they
would have had 4,520,000 years ;-)) ].

What has all this to do with cryonics?:  CREDIBILITY!
It was not until some 50 years after Copernicus' death, that
Kepler proved out his theories mathematically and
established credibility for him.

Let us hope, that Paul Wakfer and others like he can do that
for cryonics in a much shorter time period.  But for the
time being what do we have to present to sceptics? 

-  A few small organisms revived to cheerful bounciness
-  Some human (correct me, if I am wrong)and other organs    
   temporarily frozen at temperatures much too high for      
   indefinite storage.
-  Some human embryos frozen and viably revived after        
   several years.
-  Whatever it is, that Olga Visser has accomplished and    
   won't tell us about.
-  A couple of hundred optimists, who had themselves frozen, 
   trusting future technology to overcome the shortcomings   
   of our present one.
(I am sure, that I will receive corrections to the above
list.  I do not lay claim to have comprehensive knowledge
about the programme, but I believe the premiss is safe, that
the existing technological base for cryonics is *thin*.) 

What does this all lack ? - CREDIBILITY

Many of us rationalize, that the slim hope for revival is
better than certain death, but how many  have the self
assurance to withstand their friends' and families' ridicule
after they tell them, that they signed up for cryo-
preservation based on the above evidence of achievements to
date.

If Prometheus can establish, that a brain can be reactivated
and functional, that would be a *huge* step beyond the above
and toward - CREDIBILITY  

If the re-awakened brain could be proven to function
*rationally*, that would solve as far as I am concerned the
bulk of all problems *now* facing cryonics.  It would mean,
that 70% of my "self" can be preserved for future revival
(we are still arguing about the 'soul' and I have my little
pet concern: the glands and my 'emotional personality'). 
It would also represent a quantum leap toward CREDIBILITY.

At present time much of cryonet and sci.cryonics revolves
around the recruiting, subscribing to and cancelling of
cryonic preservation of and by Timothy Leary and his final
rejection of the procedure.

While I agree, that the cryonic preservation of a well known
personality like Mr. Leary is of obvious promotional value
to the cause of cryonics, the ceaseless re-hashing and re-
re-hashing of Mr. Leary's rocky road to- and away from cryo-
suspension elevates him to a level of prominence within the
cryonic community, which is may be counter productive.

To those of us, who do not adhere to the drug culture,
Timothy Leary was simply an unabashed drug user, who
happened to be highly articulate.  The high degree of
reverence accorded to him within the cryonics movement may
well suggest to many an inappropriately tolerant attitude
toward drugs by the leaders oforganizations, which are the
only ones available, to which I can *entrust* my quest for a
second and potentially much longer life.  This is very
unhelpful in garnering confidence in cryonics and -
CREDIBILITY.

Most of all we have to start pretenting to more maturity
than we evidently possess:  The childish "did so - did not"
style bickering, that is going on among the primary
proponents of cryonics is enough to make anybody, who wants
to casually inform him-/herself turn tail in a hurry.  That,
more than anything destroys our CREDIBILITY.

In my next posting I will make some concrete suggestions on
how we can clean up our act, so that we can be taken
seriously by those who are interested to learn more about
cryonics. 

Olaf Henny
-------------------------------------------------------------------
To argue with those, who have no curiosity for any viewpoint but 
their own, is rarely fruitful.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=6841