Im_thatoneguy gets it right. Objections -- knee jerk mostly -- boil down to "It's different, it's wrong, it'll never work." A manifestation of the human instinct to view the "strange" with suspicion. The good news is the "rejecters" will all die out, leaving more room for the "accepters". Then, after a time cryonics and extended life will become the norm, and adherents of "the natural way" will become a cultural oddity like the Amish. By the way, there is this default notion, accepted uncritically, that cryonic suspension is a "long shot" ie has a very low probability of success. This is nothing more than presumptive, prejudicial nay-saying, derived as it is from the "It's never been done so it must be impossible" school(sic) of logic(sic), and should be deleted in favor of a more fact-based approach. Consider: So long as you have a certain minimum degree of cellular integrity, biological function will proceed, ie you will live. Current suspension techniques (and rewarming techniques) cause a lethal degree of cellular damage. This defines the problem: to live again you need to fix the damage. Now, the good news:cryonic suspension perfectly preserves the "client" effectively with no time limit -- five hundred, five thousand, five million years. "No time limit" is a notion outside normal human experience, and needs pondering to get one's mind around the implications. Let me help you to jump ahead. All the technology that will come on stream in the next hundred, thousand, ten thousand, etc years is at your beck and call. Cellular biology provides a proof of principle for the manipulation of biological structures at the molecular level. The laws of physics clearly green light the repair of once-damaged cellular structures. The road ahead is unobstructed. From there it's little more than a numbers game. How many scientists, how many engineers, how many iterations of Moore's law, before we have sufficiently mature nanotech and the computational power to apply it to the task? Physics says "You have a go." Time says "Take as long as you need." And the trajectory of human technology is accelerating ever more rapidly in the right direction. So now, with this (putative) logic- and fact-based approach (by all means, critique this as severely as you need) , what probability would you assign to the likelihood of a successful cryonics outcome? My view: it's a near certainty. (Technically. If human screw-ups aren't factored in. Yeah, I know, huge flippin "if".)

This is the typical fact free "it'll never work" cryonics dismissal. An irrational tribal reflex. Humans, being tribal creatures cling to and defend their beliefs. Which beliefs being crucial aspects of their identity. It's an old survival necessity, without identity markers -- in this case similar beliefs -- one's tribal group would not recognize, include, and protect you. Pherthyl uncritically accepts that cryonics is bunk, and defends this prejudice with the usual bogus suite of empty factoids. This is not a personal charge directed at pherthyl. All humans do this all the time. Regarding his factoids: A person's wealth belongs to them -- not their dependents -- and is theirs to do with as they please. Dependents need to get a job, pull their own weight, and become independent. (If pherthyl is living high off of his parents gravy train, and is filled with hope, as he waits for them to die so he can have it all,... well, THAT'S selfish.) If someone were suffering from a serious illness that was very expensive to treat, would you consider withholding treatrment on the grounds that it was robbing their "dependents"? Utter nonsense. "Hair-brained scheme". Says who? And when did you become god? This is just naysayer boilerplate. The incandescent light bulb, heavier than air flight, space flight, organ transplants, cloning, etc, etc: all hair-brained schemes and impossible until they became established facts, whereupon the naysayers changed their tune, and declared that "it was always obvious." Naysayer blather always emerges from a logic- and fact-free zone. "Infinitely small chance" of successful revival." Where's anything resembling evidence to support this probability estimate? You got a crystal ball maybe? What we do know is that medical research is ongoing and shows no signs of closing up shop. Nano tech, while new, is moving ahead and looks very much like a central player in future tech capabilities. And there are no immutable laws of nature -- as we currently understand those laws -- that says revival can't be done. Simply put: if all your bio-molecules are in their proper place and you're defrosted, then -- baring magic contrarian physics -- you WILL live and breathe. Suggest otherwise if you choose, but bring along a fact or two. So, barring a fact-based rebuttal, successful revival from cryonic suspension, being a technological numbers game, with technology moving steadily in an enabling direction, ... IS A NEAR CERTAINTY. On the point of company survival, clearly, if there is a social cataclism -- hardly an impossibility in light of human destructiveness -- then cryonics probably goes down with the rest of humanity. But saying "We're doomed!", or "The sky is falling, the sky is falling!" is not an argument, it's just desperation resorted to when there are no supporting facts. It's worth noting -- for those preferring reality to hysteria -- that even during the worst plagues and wars, life actually went on quite routinely for the vast majority of humanity not actually involved in those calamities. By the way, regarding storage time (ie time to revival). there are lots of guesses out there. Personally, I put it at less than two hundred years, but hey, don't hold me to it, THAT'S JUST A GUESS. "And then you think that they would bother to revive you. That too is staggeringly unlikely." Puleeeeese. Why does a surgeon not arbitrarily walk away from the operating table in the middle of an operation? The question is too stupid even to consider. Humans help other humans for fundamental moral, legal, financial, professional, and social reasons. Those reasons are reality-based and all but immutable so long as the species exists. Clearly, pherthyl has no real knowledge of cryonics tech, people, or infrastructure. In this regard -- fact-free certainty --he is the same as most cryonics critics.