X-Message-Number: 8604 From: Tom Matthews <> Newsgroups: sci.cryonics Subject: Re: CRYONICS RESEARCH Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 19:41:16 -0700 Message-ID: <> References: <> <> Joseph J. Strout wrote: > In article <>, (Leo > Safyan) wrote: > >If you have any information at all on the following: > > > > - issues of site selection; seismic factors? > Some folks downplay seismic danger, but I think it's quite real. Cryonics > facilities need to be stable for a long time, so avoid building near fault > lines (read: avoid California and Japan!). If the are other important factors (such as a lower price of liquid nitrogen), facilities can be "hardened" for the particular kind of potential earthquake situation, and thereby made totally safe > > - airport accessability? > This is pretty important, though not vital; by the time a cryonics patient > is in an airplane, they should be fairly stable anyway. An extra hour > driving time won't make that much difference. You have it backwards, Joe. The time for getting the field team and their supplies to the dying patient is *very* critical. > > - abandoned missile silos? > > - mines? other underground structures? > Again, what's the point? A building on the corner will be far more > convenient than some abandoned underground dungeon. This depends on whether you are talking about the medical suspension or the storage. For the initial cryopreservation operation, you are correct. However, an out of the way totally secure place (like an abandoned Colorado railroad tunnel) would be great for the long-term storage part of the operation. You realy don't want it underground because of flooding possibilities. --Tom Tom Matthews All personal comments do not represent the views of anyone from: The LIFE EXTENSION FOUNDATION - http://www.lef.org - 800-841-5433 A non-profit membership organization dedicated to the extension of the healthy human lifespan through ground breaking research, innovative ideas and practical methods. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=8604