X-Message-Number: 17388
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:20:52 -0500
From: david pizer <>
Subject: More on Platt's comments on TIMESHIP

Charles Platt mentioned some things about the TimeShip project.  I have
discussed this with other cryonicists from time to time when the subject
came up, and I think a lot of cryoncists would agree with Charles.  Here
are some more comments on this project.

Charles said = >

>I'm glad that John Grigg has raised the topic of Timeship. While I hate to
>interfere with John's characteristic positivism, we might ask ourselves
>why it is worth spending $millions on a gargantuan boondoggle--the
>latter-day equivalent of an Egyptian pyramid--when the process of
>reversible cryopreservation is not yet perfected and there is great
>need for additional money to achieve that goal.

I think a lot of cryonicists will share this view.  The thought of pouring
so much money into a building of this type so the architect can get more
fame or publicity seems to turn a lot of cryonicists off.

>My nightmare scenario is to drive past the huge TimeShip building, knowing
>that the people in it are imperfectly preserved and have suffered an
>unknown degree of cellular damage, because money was squandered on a fancy
>building.

Another point many cryonicists will probably share.  

My commments on this are that even if the reversible suspended animation
techniques had been reached, this type of building will appear to many to
be an ego trip, like the "rich" people inside are "showing off."   I think
this type of building will attract and offend many people who cannot afford
the proceedure, or think cryonics is wrong, raising the risk to those
stored inside.  It will perpetuate the myth that cryonics is only for the
rich.

In addition, for this fancy building to mean more to the architect
designing it, I have heard he will be insisting that it be built in an area
where the most possible people can come and see his creation.  Florida, I
have been told is his first choice.  Perhaps near Disneyland. I think that
will be a dangerous mistake.  Florida seems to be one of the worst states
to consider with all the potential for natural dangers of weather and
flooding and the chance for political unrest when Castro dies with all the
Cuban population.  We need a state where the airports are open 365 days a
year and tornados don't cause problems on a regular basis.

>The desire to house cryonics in an impressive structure has been, I would
>say, a sickness in cryonics ever since the early 1970s. It is yet another
>manifestation of the old theory that wealthy people can be induced to
>invest in cryonics if we make it look better. This theory does not
>explain why Don Laughlin (founder of the town Laughlin, in Nevada, and
>worth maybe $400 million) signed up for cryonics when Alcor was operating
>out of a small building in Riverside with bare concrete floors and
>salvaged second-hand furniture. (Incidentally, Mr. Laughlin has made no
>secret of his commitment to cryonics.)

I think most cryonicists agree with Charles that the degree of danger to
the patients stored in a building goes up in proportion to the lavishness
of the building they are stored in.  If I were making the choice, I would
try to make the building look as common as possible on the outside and
build it like a fort on the inside.

>I have always been convinced that the primary factor, inducing smart,
>practical people to sign up, is functional credibility. In other words,
>does cryonics work? To spend huge sums of money on a glitzy building,
>which includes such flourishes as a mirrored promenade where one can
>achieve an ethereal experience by wandering through clouds of liquid
>nitrogen vapor, seems misguided, to me, when the same amount of money
>could take us a long way toward perfecting a procedure that can be proved
>to save lives.

Again, I think Charles is on point.  This building seems to project all the
(false) bad things that non-cryonicists seem to think about us.  There are
many many people who don't like what we are doing.  As long as we remain
with the appearance that we are, in many ways, average people like them
they will tolerate us.  When we begin to start to show off, their latent
natural dislike of our values will be stimulated.

>Fair disclosure: For a brief time I was a director and president of Stasis
>Foundation, which is a company that channels money to the TimeShip
>project. Also I participated in visits and discussions with architectural
>consultants. After I realized that TimeShip had a chance of actually going
>beyond the planning stage, I quit, for various reasons. I am not
>questioning the sincere motives of Bill Faloon, a prime mover of the
>project, or of Steven Valentine, the architect. I just disagree with their
>priorities.

Mr. Valentine wants to make a statement with his building.  That's his job
and his life.  He may be the best architect in the world.  But, I think
this type of building is wrong and dangerous for the people who may have to
spend many years inside.

I think the statement this lavish-appearing building will make is not
positive for cryonics, but VERY negative. 

Another big danger to cryonics will be if and when Valentine chooses his
site for this building and begins to try to move Alcor out of Arizona.  For
those of you with a short memory, when Alcor was in California the
bureaucrats there were trying to shut Alcor and cryonics down.  When Alcor
moved to Scottsdale Arizona, the mayor of Scottsdale invited Alcor's
president to his office and personally welcomed cryonics.

My point is that Arizona has *proven* to be very friendly to cryonics.  It
is the only state that I know of that has a law specifically allowing
anyone in Arizona to have their body frozen at death.  All other states
besides California (unfriendly to Alcor in the past) and Michigan (where CI
seems to be doing well) are unknown on their cryonics views and there is
always the chance that the political or local population will turn out to
be cryonics-unfriendly.

Anyone who undertands Arizona politics and values held by its citizens
knows that Arizona will probably be one of the first states to join in
allowing euthanasia for terminal people, when these laws are more
perfected.  This combined with the existing  "cryonics-is-ok" law might
lead to Arizona to be the first state to allow pre-death suspesions which
will allow people to get an even better suspension.

Lastly, I think when Valentine attempts to move Alcor out of Arizona or if
Alcor won't move and the supports of this plan have to start a new cryonics
company to get bodies to fill his building, the cryonics community will
risk another Cryowar.  The thought of moving Alcor out of Arizona with all
the benefits (political friendly, citizens don't oppose it, climate and
lack of natural disasters if favorable, laws guaranteeing it) Arizona has
will stimulate the discomfort levels of many Alcor members.  

I agree with Charles on this issue and I hope the decision-makers will
rethink some of their plans.

Dave Pizer

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=17388