X-Message-Number: 15130
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:12:01 -0500
From: david pizer <>
Subject: Urban or Rural

Where is the safest place for patients to be stored for the next 100 to 200
years, until we can reanimate most of them (if it becomes possible)?  There
is no move planned in the works for now that I know of, but who knows what
might happen in the next decade.  Now is a good time to discuss this.

Years ago, many people thought that it would be safer to store the patients
in an out-of-the-way place off the beaten path.  Alcor looked at some
remote sights and even checked out an abandoned missle silo 100 miles from
nowhere.

During those years when I was involved with Alcor management, I thought
Alcor would be safer located in a population center for several reasons:

1.	Easier to get liquid nitrogen.
2.	I felt security would be better against terroists attacks in the city
where police and fire departments could be called quickly.  I felt it would
be harder for cryonics-terroritst to attack us in the city than in a remote
isolated spot.
3.	Good quality workers would be easier to get if they could work and live
in a city than in an isolated area.
4.	I felt the chance of missle attack (probably on a populated area as
opposed to a rural area) were not very likely.
5.	I thought we looked more like main-stream technology if we were in the
middle of other cutting edge companies (Scottsdale Airpark is the middle)
and not out in the boonies, like a kook organization might be.

However, a recent assessment by the National Intelligence Council says that
the risk of a missle attack against the United States involving chemical,
biological or nuclear warheads is greater today that during most of the
cold war and will continue to grow in the next 15 years.  How much - how
fast?  They don't say

Because of the increased chance of missle attack, I think this is worth
re-considering at this time and invite discussion on cryonet (although I do
not represent Alcor in any way - we can discuss it among ourselves).  Also
there are new forms of security that would offer better protection in a
remote area.

A few years ago, Mark Voelker did a study on liquid nitrogen and found that
we could make it as cheap as we could buy it.  So if Alcor were to move to
a new area, they might want to make their own liquid nitrogen.  There are
other safety reasons why Alcor may want this capability.

There are areas that are not too remote (with an hour or so from downtown)
but are not likely targets for missle attacks, and are outside the danger
zones. As long as these were areas that have cryonics benefits like Alcor
has now, they might be sought out and discussed.   What benefits Alcor has
now for sure in Arizona are:
1.	A safe political climate.  Much better than when Alcor was in California.
2.	No earthquakes.
3.	No tornados.
4.	No civil unrest (Alcor is in a high-class area).
5.	No urban blight.
6.	Dependable liguid nitrogen supply.
7.	No flood danger.


Sometimes some of the best ideas are brought to the forum by rank and file
members, if you have any good ideas on this subject lets discuss them here.

Dave Pizer

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=15130