Why There Is No Response from Alcor?

Why There Is No Response from Alcor?

Joined: July 1st, 2007, 8:16 am

June 9th, 2009, 3:16 pm #1

The original thread is locked by the moderator, so I am responding in a new thread:

FD: “So why didn't Alcor sue THESE people?
Just wondering. I do remember seeing Pizer's post.
It did not occur to me at the time that Alcor would
actually ask for a body to be exhumed and sent to them
for, um, storage.”

I am quite disgusted by this affair, so for a moment I will play here devil’s advocate:

Looking at it objectively (without cryonics-colored glasses) one could ask why these people did not sue Alcor for gross negligence among other causes of action. Objective facts are: Alcor took a large sum of money from an elderly sick man. In exchange for his mony, Alcor promised him resurrection and a future life approaching eternity. After which Alcor promptly forgot about him. Five long years Alcor could not care less whether the old man was alive or dead. Then Alcor somehow found that the man is long dead. It walked them up really fast and realized that there is more money in the dead man’s estate. Their legal eagles concluded that the only way to get it is go to the court and demand exhumation of the old man and transfer his decomposed remains to Alcor, officially “for medical research”. Which is what they are doing. They may have more of such elderly members and this situation may be repeating itself again.
End of “Devil’s Advocate” mode.

Now I challenge Alcor to disprove this theory and explain what is going on and why for five years they did not care whether their “member(s)” is/are alive or dead.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 6th, 2004, 6:46 pm

June 9th, 2009, 3:54 pm #2

"Alcor promised him resurrection and a future life approaching eternity."

Alcor only promises to freeze you, does not promise any resurrection.



"Five long years Alcor could not care less whether the old man was alive or dead."

I doubt they have ANY interest in you except money until you're dead. How would they know unless kept informed by family?



"Alcor took a large sum of money from an elderly sick man. It walked them up really fast and realized that there is more money in the dead mans estate."

So, do you think Alcor is trying to complete their obligation and collect the remaining money they may be owed,
or do you think they're trying to keep the money they already have, which the family may be trying to get back?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 17th, 2009, 5:13 pm

June 9th, 2009, 4:45 pm #3

I think Alcor is ideologically motivated rather than financially.

They do not like seeing families ignoring the dying wishes of cryonicists and taking away their last hope of revival.

You both are obviously projecting your weird and unreasonable little belief that "cryonics is definitely a dud" onto Alcor. If there was even the slightest doubt in your mind that this was not the case, you would see that this is not about money. It's about saving lives.

The facts:

Alcor did not promise revival. Science said maybe and the guy decided to try, sans promise of any kind. That's all cryonics ever has been about.

Alcor did not take money. They were given it willingly, as payment for an expensive procedure that was to be performed. Alcor has tons of costs, including legal ones, and the more money they have the better the likelihood that they can succeed at making cryonics safe and effective for living cryonicists (who vastly outnumber the dead ones at this point).

Alcor did not let the guy down. His family did. They were the ones with the moral responsibility to the frail and declining person, and who disregarded his desires by not informing the cryonics organization of his condition.

Alcor is shouldering the financial burden of exhumation. They are going the second mile in this case to ensure that this never happens again.

Both of you have presented a nonstop stream of conspiracy theories rather than face the fact that cryonics is a legitimate political and emotional movement where people are trying to save lives by an unconventional, yet scientifically plausible means. I am not going to take either of you seriously until you wise up and start talking like sane, rational individuals who respect the rights of others to different beliefs and practices which are harmful to no one.

TWRelated, you claim to be related to TW and upset at his alleged desecration, disregarding the documentation stating that he wanted this for himself and going with his earlier will. If the later documents were forged, I can see how you have a point. But here you are not upset at all at the desecration of this man's corpse, which he specifically stated was to be either preserved for revival or used for research to help revive others. To not honor his last wishes was desecration. If you are anti-desecration, you should be nearly as upset at the relatives by this as I am. I suspect you are actually just anti-cryonics instead.

George1st, you claim to be a cryonicist who is simply playing devil's advocate, but all I have ever seen from you are conspiracy theories, unreasonable speculation, and false accusations. If you have something to say in favor of cryonics, say it. If you have constructive criticism, make it constructively. If you have an outsider's perspective, offer it as an honest outsider. Otherwise, please just shut up and leave cryonics alone.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 6th, 2004, 6:46 pm

June 9th, 2009, 5:10 pm #4

1) I read the news reports and I believe Alcor is right in pursuing this.

2) Ted Williams never signed anything regarding cryonics.

3) The "greasy note" was never accepted by a court of law, only by the executor of the estate.

4) Apparently in Florida, a handwritten note cannot take precedent over a will.

5) No family member had any money to pursue the situation any further but it was believed he could have been released with $50,000. in legal fees.


I don't consider my beliefs weird or unreasonable; neither do I consider yours.

I never mentioned any conspiracy.

I'm only anti-cryonics for Ted Williams, because he personally called it BULLSHIT while he was alive. And every person has a right to choose for themselves.

Anyone else is free to do whatever they like with their money and their future. I think people here know that about me.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2007, 8:16 am

June 9th, 2009, 5:44 pm #5

I think Alcor is ideologically motivated rather than financially.

They do not like seeing families ignoring the dying wishes of cryonicists and taking away their last hope of revival.

You both are obviously projecting your weird and unreasonable little belief that "cryonics is definitely a dud" onto Alcor. If there was even the slightest doubt in your mind that this was not the case, you would see that this is not about money. It's about saving lives.

The facts:

Alcor did not promise revival. Science said maybe and the guy decided to try, sans promise of any kind. That's all cryonics ever has been about.

Alcor did not take money. They were given it willingly, as payment for an expensive procedure that was to be performed. Alcor has tons of costs, including legal ones, and the more money they have the better the likelihood that they can succeed at making cryonics safe and effective for living cryonicists (who vastly outnumber the dead ones at this point).

Alcor did not let the guy down. His family did. They were the ones with the moral responsibility to the frail and declining person, and who disregarded his desires by not informing the cryonics organization of his condition.

Alcor is shouldering the financial burden of exhumation. They are going the second mile in this case to ensure that this never happens again.

Both of you have presented a nonstop stream of conspiracy theories rather than face the fact that cryonics is a legitimate political and emotional movement where people are trying to save lives by an unconventional, yet scientifically plausible means. I am not going to take either of you seriously until you wise up and start talking like sane, rational individuals who respect the rights of others to different beliefs and practices which are harmful to no one.

TWRelated, you claim to be related to TW and upset at his alleged desecration, disregarding the documentation stating that he wanted this for himself and going with his earlier will. If the later documents were forged, I can see how you have a point. But here you are not upset at all at the desecration of this man's corpse, which he specifically stated was to be either preserved for revival or used for research to help revive others. To not honor his last wishes was desecration. If you are anti-desecration, you should be nearly as upset at the relatives by this as I am. I suspect you are actually just anti-cryonics instead.

George1st, you claim to be a cryonicist who is simply playing devil's advocate, but all I have ever seen from you are conspiracy theories, unreasonable speculation, and false accusations. If you have something to say in favor of cryonics, say it. If you have constructive criticism, make it constructively. If you have an outsider's perspective, offer it as an honest outsider. Otherwise, please just shut up and leave cryonics alone.
Luke Parrish: “I think Alcor is ideologically motivated rather than financially”

RESPONSE: (Repeating your own words): “You are obviously projecting”, not knowing anything about Alcor’s motives.

[Hostile unresponsive drivel deleted]

Luke Parrish: “Otherwise, please just shut up and leave cryonics alone.”

RESPONSE: I was genuinely disgusted with this case and had every right to express it the way I did. I requested a response from Alcor not from you. You are only an outsider, just like me. So do not try to put your unqualified, uneducated opinion in place of Alcor’s response. You have a lot to learn before you can engage in a cryonics discussion. Where you got your ideas about slicing brains by lasers and sterilizations by viruses? From Dick Tracy’s comics books, or would it be an extension of Karl Eichmann’s medical experiments?

Your claim of inalienable, constitutional right to cryopreservation makes you a cultish fanatic, not a cryonicist.

As for your laughable demand that I “just shut up and leave cryonics alone”, the only possible response (with apologies to moderator) is: “Make me, pu--y”.

George
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 17th, 2009, 5:13 pm

June 9th, 2009, 6:27 pm #6

1) I read the news reports and I believe Alcor is right in pursuing this.

2) Ted Williams never signed anything regarding cryonics.

3) The "greasy note" was never accepted by a court of law, only by the executor of the estate.

4) Apparently in Florida, a handwritten note cannot take precedent over a will.

5) No family member had any money to pursue the situation any further but it was believed he could have been released with $50,000. in legal fees.


I don't consider my beliefs weird or unreasonable; neither do I consider yours.

I never mentioned any conspiracy.

I'm only anti-cryonics for Ted Williams, because he personally called it BULLSHIT while he was alive. And every person has a right to choose for themselves.

Anyone else is free to do whatever they like with their money and their future. I think people here know that about me.
I may have overstated some things. I don't know everything. I was just frustrated at the way things seem to go on this board, over and over this spiral of subtle and not-so-subtle accusations -- and I hate it worse when I find myself becoming a part of it. My attacks on George may not have been as justified as they felt at the time either.

Honestly I am one of the few nerds who never heard of Ted Williams until the cryonics story... I've never been into baseball or any other sport. Sounds like he was a good person though, in addition to being a skilled athlete. And I am sorry about both your personal loss and the big media issue it became.

It does seem logically possible that someone could call cryonics "bullshit" at one point and change his mind later. But I am speaking as someone who has a positive view of the practice... If I was certain that it was impossible to reanimate someone, I might find that harder to believe.

I am not truly qualified to make claims as to whether someone I didn't know personally would have changed their mind on something like this. I am however planning to be alive to find out the truth of the matter at some point when/if they actually bring him back.

If you keep hanging out here, perhaps we cryos can talk you into joining us at some point.

Wouldn't it be cool if we all thaw out 100 years hence and TW is there to tell us that, yes, as a matter of fact, he was against it? I'm just imagining him yelling at JH about how idiotic and disrespectful the whole stunt was.

I want to thank you for not finding our beliefs ridiculous. I apologize for using that term to refer to the opposite belief -- I really only did that in an attempt to illustrate the point that there are two sides to the coin.

(Time to remind myself that the lack of emotional bandwidth on the net tends to make sarcasm, hyperbole, etc. a bad idea. And to take things less seriously.)

I am glad to hear that your opinion is consistently in favor of respecting last wishes. That is something I can respect, even if I feel like preserving lives should be given slightly higher precedence.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 8th, 2009, 3:02 am

June 9th, 2009, 6:34 pm #7

The original thread is locked by the moderator, so I am responding in a new thread:

FD: “So why didn't Alcor sue THESE people?
Just wondering. I do remember seeing Pizer's post.
It did not occur to me at the time that Alcor would
actually ask for a body to be exhumed and sent to them
for, um, storage.”

I am quite disgusted by this affair, so for a moment I will play here devil’s advocate:

Looking at it objectively (without cryonics-colored glasses) one could ask why these people did not sue Alcor for gross negligence among other causes of action. Objective facts are: Alcor took a large sum of money from an elderly sick man. In exchange for his mony, Alcor promised him resurrection and a future life approaching eternity. After which Alcor promptly forgot about him. Five long years Alcor could not care less whether the old man was alive or dead. Then Alcor somehow found that the man is long dead. It walked them up really fast and realized that there is more money in the dead man’s estate. Their legal eagles concluded that the only way to get it is go to the court and demand exhumation of the old man and transfer his decomposed remains to Alcor, officially “for medical research”. Which is what they are doing. They may have more of such elderly members and this situation may be repeating itself again.
End of “Devil’s Advocate” mode.

Now I challenge Alcor to disprove this theory and explain what is going on and why for five years they did not care whether their “member(s)” is/are alive or dead.
What I am realizing more and more is how very small these two cryonics facilities really are and how small is their staff. I have been working diligently since January to be a member of Alcor, relocated all the way from the middle of the Pacific Ocean, gotten funded, filled out all the forms, paid dues or whatever, etc. and have yet to even have one slip of paper to prove membership or anything else. The personnel are nice and all, but somehow proper support for current members is lacking. I walked into a local bank recently and found cookies and coffee out for customers. Haven't seen any cookies around Alcor yet -. I think these outfits might profit from the examples of successful churches and other businesses.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 17th, 2009, 5:13 pm

June 9th, 2009, 8:29 pm #8

Luke Parrish: “I think Alcor is ideologically motivated rather than financially”

RESPONSE: (Repeating your own words): “You are obviously projecting”, not knowing anything about Alcor’s motives.

[Hostile unresponsive drivel deleted]

Luke Parrish: “Otherwise, please just shut up and leave cryonics alone.”

RESPONSE: I was genuinely disgusted with this case and had every right to express it the way I did. I requested a response from Alcor not from you. You are only an outsider, just like me. So do not try to put your unqualified, uneducated opinion in place of Alcor’s response. You have a lot to learn before you can engage in a cryonics discussion. Where you got your ideas about slicing brains by lasers and sterilizations by viruses? From Dick Tracy’s comics books, or would it be an extension of Karl Eichmann’s medical experiments?

Your claim of inalienable, constitutional right to cryopreservation makes you a cultish fanatic, not a cryonicist.

As for your laughable demand that I “just shut up and leave cryonics alone”, the only possible response (with apologies to moderator) is: “Make me, pu--y”.

George
I don't really care if you vaguely feel like something I said was vaguely like something a fanatic would say. But if you can prove logically that anything said is unreasonable or needs modification in some particular way, I would be quite interested to hear that.


I hold that cryopreservation is an inalienable right if the following are true:
1. Life (including medical treatment and food necessary to extend life) is inalienable moral right.
2. Cryopreservation is a plausible method of extending life.

Some people question the second assertion. Some don't hold to the first. I would be willing to debate either of those positions independently. A fanatic is generally unwilling to break down their belief and debate a particular aspect of it, because it only makes sense when taken as a whole.


I believe that a virus that reversibly "sterilizes" human beings would be less morally offensive than war, environmental devastation, famine, or a virus that kills people or makes them suffer. I don't suggest that it would be morally neutral, but merely that there are, unfortunately, many worse things possible in the world.

Note that the word "sterilize" has a connotation of irreversibility that is utterly inappropriate here since reversibility was specified. The people in my purely hypothetical scenario would be no more "sterilized" than a woman who takes any ordinarily prescribed contraceptive.


I proposed that slicing the brain after legal death could be a method of attaining greater neural preservation than relying on the body's natural circulatory system to convey the cryoprotectant to all areas where it would be necessary. I further proposed that this could lead to enhanced cooling and thus reduced fracturing, which could lead to an easier reanimation.

I freely admit to being a layman, and not a specialist in this area. A specialist would be more qualified than myself to rate the probable effects of such a course of action, taking into account all the precautions I specified (robotic handling, laser slicing).


If you think you know more than me on any or all of these subjects, by all means prove it. Don't just sit there and make accusations. If you are a specialist, more educated than me, feel free to put me in my place. Trot out the facts and figures, prove that it cannot be so... Education gives you the power to do that. If not, try and find a specialist who can, or do some research to find a way to defeat my arguments. I don't mind.

I only requested that you quit falsely representing your feelings on the subject of cryonics if that is what you are doing. If you are hostile, be openly hostile. If you are undecided, be undecided. Take a reasonable position of some kind and I'll either agree or disagree with the position based on my interpretation of the evidence for or against it. There is no reason this has to be about you and me -- it is bigger than either of us.

That's my opinion.

P.S. Anyone who wants to quote any of the above in a seperate thread with a rebuttal, feel free.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2007, 8:16 am

June 10th, 2009, 2:34 am #9

“I don't really care if you vaguely feel like something I said was vaguely like something a fanatic would say.”

Nothing vague. I think anyone who proposes to infect the world’s population with virus in order to make it sterile is a nutcase.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 25th, 2007, 2:45 pm

June 10th, 2009, 7:13 pm #10

...
Quote
Like
Share