John,
Have you been reading our publications on the ramifications and benefits
of curing the 'old age disease'? Your solutions to typical resistance
parallel what we have discussed in our groups.
It is highly refreshing to meet an independent thinker who does not think
like sheep.
On Tue, 14 Feb 1995, John de Rivaz wrote:
> In article: <Pine.SOL.3.91.950212144723.16568A-100000 at corona> Patrick
> O'Neil <patrick at corona> writes:
> > Conversely, I have considered the wideer ramifications of such
> > manipulations and capabilities and have come to the conclusion that
> > significant life extension in general would be disastrous. The worl
> >
> There are a few points I would like to raise here.
>> 1. That made by George Bernard Shaw - people living longer lives would be
> personally concerned about the future and have less need to reproduce.
>> 2. As population growth is exponential, if everyone who ever died was
> resurrected, it would only double the world's population. And we are taling
> about life extension, not resurrection.
>> 3. by refusing life extension research on the grounds of population, we are
> doing the same thing as saying to old people that we will not give you
> access to medical treatment because we want to make room for someone else,
> and that expands into "we will kill you to make room for someone else".
>> 4. Some children were once asked if they met god, what would they ask. One
> said: "Why do you go on making more people when you don't look after those
> you have got?"
>> 5. It is uneconomic to pay to educate new people if we can go on getting
> contributions from those we have already educated.
>> Further comments welcomed, please.
>>> --
> Sincerely, ****************************************
> * Publisher of Longevity Report *
> John de Rivaz * Fractal Report *
> * details on request *
> ****************************************
> **** What is the point of life if it ends in death? ****
>>>