Wie sollten wir die Praxis nennen, Menschen für die zukünftige Wiederbelebung zu bewahren?
https://open.substack.com/pub/preservinghope/p/what-should-we-call-the-practice?r=3ba3ec&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
Wie sollten wir die Praxis nennen, Menschen für die zukünftige Wiederbelebung zu bewahren?
https://open.substack.com/pub/preservinghope/p/what-should-we-call-the-practice?r=3ba3ec&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
3 Kommentare
In 1962, Robert Ettinger began popularizing the concept of preserving human bodies at cold temperatures in hopes of extending life. However, while Ettinger was the first to formally describe this idea, he didn’t coin a memorable term for it. According to Ben Best, former president of the Cryonics Institute, the term *cryonics* [was first introduced in 1965](https://www.benbest.com/cryonics/history.html) by New York industrial designer Karl Werner.
While the term served adequately for decades, two developing factors are making it feel increasingly inadequate…
A scam. There are no effective means to do this currently, and no indication it could ever be possible. Cooling people has of course been shown to limit damage that some brain swelling can cause. But there’s no reason to believe that you can ‚freeze‘ someone, or preserve them for very, very long periods and revive them.
Considering the fact that humanity is in a downward spiral, I would suggest ‚retro sex slave harvesting‘.