How many people have been cryogenically frozen?

By -
Only about 90, according to this ESPN (!) story. (BTW, the article makes it sound as if the proper term is "cryonically frozen," but that sounds weirder than Walt Disney.) Wikipedia lists 8 of the people.

Comments

  1. TokyoTom5:06 AM

    Bob, where have you been the past six years? Inquiring minds and all that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob Murphy10:47 AM

    ? I wasn't frozen, if that's what you mean.

    ReplyDelete
  3. TokyoTom11:12 PM

    Then I'm puzzled, Bob. I thought that, like me, you and Gene were part of "God's frozen people";).

    Further, your interest in cryonics and reference to an article that's now six years old (with Ted and the son mentioned in the article now BOTH being frozen) seemed like evidence that you are a more advanced alcolyte than me.

    So if you're not studying up on Limbo, what's going on?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Bob Murphy11:29 PM

    Uh, I dunno what to tell you TT. The other day I wondered how many people have been cryogenically frozen, I googled for 3 minutes, and posted the most informative things I found.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more