X-Message-Number: 18342 Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 05:54:25 -0800 From: James Bryan Swayze <> Subject: Rumored Timeship proposed location References: <> > > > Message #18331 > From: (Rick Potvin) > Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 08:17:14 -0700 (MST) > Subject: Timeship Forum > > http://network54.com/forum/176200 > This threaded discussion forum, moderated by Rick Potvin, will focus in > on various aspects of the Timeship project. Anyone may participate. The > moderator is not connected to Timeship in any way but is an Alcor > member. > > <first submitted to Rick Potvin's forum on subject of Timeship developments> I think it is a serious mistake to locate the Timeship in Florida if in fact that is the proposed site location. The reason is quite simple but controversial. If Global Warming continues unabated most of Florida will be under water. I don't think the Timeship is designed to float or be submarine. Global Warming has been disputed by mainly two factions. One being scientists with backing from environmentalists and the other big business supported mainly by the oil industry. The oil industry claims the other sides science is false and based on models that do not reflect reality. The scientists back their claims with trend data and ice core evidence of rising CO2 content in the atmosphere. To me the argument is simple. Follow the money. Big business stands to profit if the status quo remains and they try to use their own pseudo science to claim the Earth will be greener if CO2 rises to meet the needs of plants that require it for respiration. This seems like a reckless gamble. The scientists and environmentalists don't have a money based ax to grind. They merely seek truth and the preservation of *ALL* life on Earth. The choice seems simple. If money were not an issue the oil industry could claim a higher moral ground but money is an issue so their arguments are suspect. Florida is also ravaged yearly by raging hurricane storms. The trend for these has been one of ever increasing ferocity. Global Warming is also a factor here. As the planet warms more water is saturates the atmosphere. Water is a good conductor of heat and so traps heat in the atmosphere. This accelerates the warming and more. Water makes the air heavy and thus winds are more forceful... storms more powerful and destructive. Here's a no brainer. Florida is HOT! The Timeship as I understand it, having talked with Stephen Valentine, the architect of the Timeship, and been asked by him to submit any ideas I had for it, is supposed to be self sufficient so that it will continue to operate despite local problems with power outages and etc. It seems to me that an air-conditioned room would be better suited for the operation of a suspension and perfusion than a room at the temperature of the hot outside atmosphere. Furthermore it seems to me that LN2 boil off will be greater where the temperature differential between the top of a dewar possibly absent of liquid and that of the outside air. After all dewars are insulated to help keep the contents separated from the outside air and it's warmer temperature. Greater LN2 boil off will increase the maintenance costs of keeping the dewar housed patients safely chilled. In the case of a power outage, should there be any delay in auxiliary power taking over--after all one must consider all possible situations one is able to foresee, a warmer outside atmosphere will vastly shorten the amount of response time available to workout the power issue before damage occurs to patients. Therefore through the above considerations it is my opinion that a cold weather environment location would be preferable to Florida any day. James -- My website: http://www.davidpascal.com/swayze A collection of photos of me and some of my artwork: http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4292752723&code=2039335&mode=invite A radio interview on Dr. J's ChangeSurfer Radio program with me and the father of cryonics Prof. Robert Ettinger, author of "The Prospect of Immortality": http://www.radio4all.net/proginfo.php?id=3728 Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=18342