Of all the locations, why would they possibly choose a barrier island in a major hurricane belt.
Sure they say that the building is built to withstand the worst possible hurricanes. But it certainly wouldn't be a first time that the engineers were wrong. What possible reasoning could justify this? Even if the University of Texas truly has the best possible people for doing this research, why do they have to do it Galveston of all the idiotic locations? I know that nowhere is truly safe, but Galveston? Building anything there is stupid let alone a laboratory with level four pathogens.
People talk about New Orleans being built in a bad place. Its nothing compared to Galveston.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even if that were true, that the only thing left would be the building, why is that a GOOD thing? Put the damn thing in the middle of Wyoming or something where no one is nearby and it's not in a major disaster zone.
posted
Obviously, it's there because, well, look who the President has been for the last 8 years. A Texan. Texas politicians steered this to their state. It really belongs in rural Maine, where there are almost no natural disasters like earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc. Microbes have trouble with colder weather, and, finally, rural Maine is truly rural. Pathogens are less likely to spread in an extremely rural area because of the relative lack of people to infect.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's why I said Wyoming. It has all of that, plus the lowest population density in the country other than Alaska, but it's still accessible, which much of Alaska isn't without a sea plane.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Pathogens are less likely to spread in an extremely rural area because of the relative lack of people to infect.
The problem is that the rural areas don't always stay that way. There's a BSL-4 lab outside DC which was in a remote area until the nearby suburbs began to surround it.
quote:Pathogens are less likely to spread in an extremely rural area because of the relative lack of people to infect.
The problem is that the rural areas don't always stay that way. There's a BSL-4 lab outside DC which was in a remote area until the nearby suburbs began to surround it.
--j_k
USAMRIID? It was not really all that rural at the time the building was built, although these days Fredrick is far busier.
I should know, I was stationed there for almost 3 years.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: Obviously, it's there because, well, look who the President has been for the last 8 years. A Texan. Texas politicians steered this to their state. It really belongs in rural Maine, where there are almost no natural disasters like earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, etc. Microbes have trouble with colder weather, and, finally, rural Maine is truly rural. Pathogens are less likely to spread in an extremely rural area because of the relative lack of people to infect.
That doesn't explain it. Texas is a big state with lots of wide open areas that are neither in the Hurricane Belt or the Tornado Belt.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let me get this straight. They are putting the bio-defense lab that studies foot and mouth disease in the middle of tornado alley and smack dab in the middle of cattle country?
What is wrong with these people!!!!
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Kansas officials mounted one of the most aggressive efforts to win the new lab, forming a special task force to lobby Homeland Security officials after Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., promoted its economic potential.
The Kansas legislature approved $105 million in bonds to buy land, upgrade roads, install a security fence and build a utility plant at the site on the Kansas State University campus.
They kinda did it to themselves.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
University of Texas already has a bio-hazard lab, which got flooded by hurricane Ike.
And yer missing the point anyways. The purpose of a bio-hazard lab is to create viruses which transform people into zombies, and to "accidentally" release them. Problem with most places is that folks are on constant vigilance for a zombie outbreak, looking for the slightest excuse to vent their hostilities on safe*targets. Whereas Texas provides perfect camouflage: be hard-pressed to tell a zombie from just another Texan without first resorting to some rather sophisticated lab work. Therebye creating a high probability that the original contagion can last long enough to create a self-perpetuating horde.
* A safe target being one which won't getcha jailed for blasting away at it.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
