I don't think the odds are good. Getting serious about cryonics will break a whole bunch of implicit assumptions about the order of life, and people who haven't signed out from the norms and conventions layer of mainstream society to the degree of your average outcast LessWronger are going to be keenly aware of the unspoken rules that are being broken.

Telling people that there's reason to think cryonics is a valid option and that you support it is good, but trying to get to the bottom of all disagreements beyond that seems like taking it on yourself to make a religious fundamentalist relative accept evolution. It's probably not going to happen, because the surface level argument is tied up to a head full of invisible machinery that won't respond to reasoning about technical feasibility.