On 11/22/2008 09:04 AM, Steve Floyd wrote:
> I agree with many of Paul's comments, including where he states:
>
> > One that I must point out here will make any knowledgeable person
> > shake hir head and immediately dismiss the intelligence of all
> > cryonicists. It is the following:
> >
> > "[Some cryonicists] are environmentalists who ... are happy that no
> > electricity is used to upkeep their preserved remains (only liquid
> > nitrogen), and that their carbon footprint is only pennies each year."
>
> Upon reading the above, quoted statement of yours, Shannon, about
> cryonicists being environmentalists I became a bit concerned. I don't
> think that kind of generalization is appropriate. I think you may be
> using this statement as a way to appeal to as wide of an audience as
> possible (here, trying to appeal to environmentalists). Perhaps it is
> useful to "cut environmentalists off at the pass" with the statement
> about the upkeep of preservation being low. However, when I read it it
> seemed like a desperate attempt to appeal to more people. Perhaps it
> could be re-worded to show its benefits without sounding this way?

Since Shannon made it clear in her original that it was only some
cryoncists who were environmentally concerned, her environmentalist
argument was not out of place to me, but rather an initially good
move. When one is trying to "sell" something, it is perfect valid and
reasonable to make use of all possible honest and correct ways to make
any attribute of that thing appealing. Note that in your criticism of
Shannon in this regard, relying on my quote was not sufficient. In
order to properly make your case you should have quoted her "petition"
directly, particularly since your criticism was not the same as mine.

However, perhaps it is necessary to explain what I thought would be
obvious by my comment above:

"One [statement of Shannon's "petition"] that I must point out here
will make any knowledgeable person shake hir head and immediately
dismiss the intelligence of all cryonicists."

with which Steve said that he agreed, but gave no indication that he
understood its point.

Although nitrogen comprises about 80% of Earth's atmosphere and is
effectively a totally free resource, the only way to produce liquid
nitrogen is to expend an enormous amount of energy to cool it down to
its liquefaction temperature (about -196' C). The production of this
energy either directly or, as usually done, through the intermediary
of electricity, is therefore generating the same average "carbon
footprint" as other usages of that same amount of energy. In addition,
maintenance of cryonics patients requires the use of electricity for
monitoring and various other administrative needs. So, unfortunately,
Shannon's attempt to appeal to environmentalists using a low "carbon
footprint" argument, while well-meaning, ends up being a black mark
against her intelligence, or at least knowledge, and by implication
that of all cyronicists.

I have no comment on the rest and have snipped it.

--Paul