10 replies to this topic

[Mind]

You might have caught wind of this through email or discussions in the forums - there is a facebook cause for generating $1,000,000 dollars for the SENS Foundation. The aim is to get 10,000 people to pledge $100 each. You can pledge by joining the cause page here.

If the goal is reached before the end of the year, then the $1,000,000 will become $1,500,000 because Peter Thiel's 50% matching grant for SENS Foundation donations is in effect until December 31st 2009. Join the cause and give a gift to life extension this holiday season!

[freethinker]

From the SENS Foundation website:

Those 10,000 donations will provide SENS Foundation with $1 million [up to $1.5 million] of additional funding, which will support our critical research into defeating the diseases and disabilities of aging. Over the course of 2010 we intend to increase funding to our LysoSENS program and ramp up work on, as well as continuing to pursue our work on atherosclerosis, immunosenescence, and macular degeneration.

Here is a short youtube video that we created to raise awareness about the cause:


You can share it with others to help spread the word.

[freethinker]

[Mind]

Thanks to everyone who joined during this last push at the end of 2009! A little short of the goal but we gained a bunch of new pledges.

[Elus]

Thanks to everyone who joined during this last push at the end of 2009! A little short of the goal but we gained a bunch of new pledges.

I'll get my parents to join real quick!

[Elus]

We need more people on this. It's a small commitment in the long run, and if it is achieved it could have profound effects on SENS research.

[MentalParadox]

I'm all for Life extension, but I can't support SENS. I don't want to risk losing hundreds of euros to what may very well be pseudoscience. I wonder why the organisations promising the larges breakthroughs are always the ones relying on "donations". Somehow, I find that suspicious.

How do you explain away this?http://www.technologyreview.com/sens/docs/estepetal.pdf

The moment someone presents me with a theory/project that can actually confront and overcome criticism instead of having to ignore it, I will donate a lot of cash.

Edited by Timotheos Aionon, 20 February 2011 - 10:26 AM.

[caliban]

Automatic message


This topic has been moved from "Community -> LongeCity" to "Action! -> Projects & Teams -> SENS & Methuselah -> SENS".

[caliban]

N.B. the above fundraising effort if from 2009 and no longer actively promoted.

Timotheos Aionon, you cite an odd source for your criticism. The rebuttal can be found here

with the outcome:

No one has won our $20,000 Challenge to disprove Aubrey de Grey's anti-aging proposals.

[MentalParadox]

N.B. the above fundraising effort if from 2009 and no longer actively promoted.

Timotheos Aionon, you cite an odd source for your criticism. The rebuttal can be found here

with the outcome:

No one has won our $20,000 Challenge to disprove Aubrey de Grey's anti-aging proposals.

If the source is so odd or "insignificant", then I wonder why De Grey bothered to formulate a rebuttal at all.
Also, isn't there a rule saying the one making claims must deliver the evidence? Saying "you can't disprove my theory" is EXACTLY the same as saying "God exists, and you can't prove he doesn't".
But oh well. I'm pleased to see LongeCity appears to look at multiple approaches to anti-aging, and not just SENS.

[Pour_la_Science]

No, I think it's a good subject. Because lots of people are discussing or rising objections about SENS. And members of SENS are still visiting this forum I think...


The fact is SENS is not exactly a "science theory" but more a "technological theory". It doesnt' want to prove that Immortality resides in our mitochondria or anything, neither that "God exists". All the science based about SENS wasn't created by De Grey's fundations (the ROS theory of aging, the mitochondrial theory of aging etc... -well, except the theory about the "survival of the slowest").
The only way to prove that a technology thoery works is to realize that, make the theory happens... you can't test a theory other way than in real life. It's the same for testing drugs: We know so many so efficient drugs on the papers, supposed to block specifically and efficiently only this cell ion canal, but proves wrong in clinical studies !

. And for this, you need money... I know it's a bit of a circular reasoning and I think it's all the problem for SENS. People want facts to give money, but money is needed to create facts...

Edited by Pour_la_Science, 21 February 2011 - 08:56 AM.