Walt Disney is Cryogenically Frozen (and will be thawed in the near future)

A former Disney employee? I myself am interested in working for the Disney company in the near future. It is a small world after all!But let us not stray too far away from formalities and the topic - I will begin with my introductory arguments.First, an introduction of the technology of Cryonic Preservation.Argument 1: The Feasibility of Cryonic Preservationcry·on·ics (krī-!5;n′ĭks) n. (used with a sing. verb) The process of freezing and storing the body of a diseased, recently deceased person to prevent tissue decomposition so that at some future time the person might be brought back to life upon development of new medical cures. [4] The crux of my entire assertion of this topic, I believe, rests in the feasibility of Cryonic Preservation. If Cryonic Preservation is not feasible, nor even possible, then the entire theory of the upkeep of Walt Disney's being is ultimately false.Therefore, the first part of this argument is, can doctors bring a patient, who was objectively announced dead, back to life? Argument 1, Part 1: According to Sam Parnia, MD, PhD, Director of Resuscitation Research at Stony Brook University School of Medicine, they can.“Contrary to popular belief, death is not a moment in time, such as when the heart stops beating, respiration ceases, or the brain stops functioning,” explains Dr. Parnia. “Death, rather, is a process—a process that can be interrupted well after it has begun.” [1.1]According to his faculty page, Dr. Sam Parnia specializes in "cardiac arrest resuscitation, brain resuscitation and the cognitive sequelae of surviving cardiac arrest including near death experiences." and is also the author of two books, including "Erasing Death (2013) and What Happens When We Die (2006)"[1.2]A 2013 BBC article concerning health, science, and technology also offers this insight into the feasibility of the reversal of death:"Most people consider death as a single moment – a person is present, and then he or she is not. It is the turning off of life’s switch, typically registered as the moment that person’s heart stops beating. Today, around 95% of death certificates use this event to note the time of passing, and for the vast majority of human history, this thinking reflected reality. If a person’s heart stopped beating, he or she had been issued a death sentence. There was no bringing them back. In the early 1960s, however, researchers began to challenge that assumption [more on this later]. Closed chest compressions combined with mouth-to-mouth breathing could alter a person’s fate by restarting their heart. Even then, doctors presumed that within moments after blood ceases to flow the victim’s brain begins to break down, soon rendering them into a vegetative state – even if their heart was restarted. “We were all taught that we have five minutes after the heart stops,” Parnia says. “Now we realise that’s outdated, that in fact brain cells don’t die immediately.” Researchers now understand that cells and organs undergo their own deaths, a process that can take hours or even days depending upon circumstances. In an extreme example, muscle stem cells can remain viable in human cadavers for up to 17 days, a 2012 study found, so long as they are not contaminated by oxygen. A person who does not respond after 20 to 30 minutes of resuscitation efforts will probably not make a meaningful recovery, but that time limit is not set. Science is far from establishing when a body’s capacity for consciousness actually leaves it. “We don’t know how long it takes after death for the cells to decay to such a point that no matter what you do, you can never get them back again,” Parnia says. Which means that humans may take hours to fully die. In a remarkable 2011 case, a woman in Japan, intent on committing suicide, wandered into a forest and overdosed on pills. The next morning, a passerby found her. When emergency personnel arrived, her body temperature was 20C. She had no pulse and was not breathing. Efforts to shock her heart into action failed, but rather than send her to the morgue, doctors connected her to an extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) machine – a device that acts as an artificial lung and heart, and is a standard of care in Japan – and left her to circulate. Several hours into the procedure, her heart fluttered back to life..." Argument 1, Part 2: And, to provide insight into the second point of my first argument of whether or not Cryonic Preservation is feasible, "...The woods’ cool temperature, it turned out, had prevented the woman’s cells from breaking down as quickly as they would have in a warmer environment, allowing her to lay dead in the forest for around four hours, plus survive an additional six hours between the time the passerby called the ambulance and the time her heart began beating again. Three weeks later, she left the hospital, and today she is happily married and recently delivered a baby. “If one of our [emergency medical service] crews found that young girl, she would have just been declared dead,” Parnia says."[2.1] So, is the Reversal of Death and Cryonic Preservation feasible? Well, according to the US National Library of Medicine, "There is little dispute that the condition of a person stored at the temperature of liquid nitrogen is stable, but the process of freezing inflicts a level of damage which cannot be reversed by current medical technology."[3] Therefore, my first argument stands. [1.1] - http://sb.cc.stonybrook.edu...[1.2] - http://medicine.stonybrookmedicine.edu...[2.1] - http://www.bbc.com...[3.1] - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...[4] - http://www.thefreedictionary.com...Argument 2: Walt Disney Was Aware of Cryonic Preservation.A short introduction from the Encyclopedia Britannica:"Walt Disney, byname of Walter Elias Disney (born December 5, 1901, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.—died December 15, 1966, Los Angeles, California), American motion-picture and television producer and showman, famous as a pioneer of animated cartoon films and as the creator of such cartoon characters as Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck. He also planned and built Disneyland, a huge amusement park that opened near Los Angeles in 1955, and before his death he had begun building a second such park, Walt Disney World, near Orlando, Florida." [5]Proving Cryonic Preservation is feasible is nothing to the proof of this debate topic without the proof that Walt Disney was definitively aware of Cryonic Preservation to begin with. As I had mentioned ahead of time in the previous argument, "In the early 1960s, however, researchers began to challenge that assumption [that is, that "death is a death sentence"]"[2.1].Interestingly, Walt's interest in cryogenics is not listed in one, but two biographies. A few of the notable quotes from these books include:"Disney's growing preoccupation with his own mortality also led him to explore the science of cryogenics, the freezing of an aging or ill person until such time as the human body can be revived and restored to health. Disney often mused to Roy about the notion of perhaps having himself frozen, an idea which received . . . indulgent nods from his brother . . ."[6.1]"[T]he chief problem that troubled Walt was the length of time it might take the doctors to perfect the process. How long would it be before the surgical experts could bring a treated cadaver back to working life? To be brutally practical, could it be guaranteed, in fact, that he could be brought back in time to rectify the mistakes his successors would almost certainly start making at EPCOT the moment he was dead?" [6.2]"It was about this time that Walt Disney became acquainted with the experiments into the process known as cryogenesis, or what one newspaper termed "the freeze-drying of the human cadaver after death, for eventual resuscitation."[6.2]The first officially documented account of Cryonic Preservation, according to the Alcor Life Extension Foundation, was in the January of 1967 [7], whereas Walt Disney was officially announced dead in the December of 1966 [5] - which was practically a month before. We know that Walt Disney was one for being the first to use some of the latest technology on the market - such as technicolor animations, animatronics, the multiplane camera - so we know that it is absolutely possible that Cryonic Preservation may very well have been a technology which he would have pursued.After reviewing the evidence, my second argument stands.[5] - http://www.britannica.com...[6.1] - The book, "Walt Disney - Hollywood's Dark Prince", authored by Marc Eliot.[6.2] - The book, "Disney's World", authored by Leonard Mosely.[7] - http://www.alcor.org...Possible Counterarguments:-Denial by the Disney Family.I expect this argument to be one of the first that my opponent brings to the table. Above all, this is more of a family issue than my issue, so I wouldn't know for certain. (Think of it this way - the Jackson family denies the allegations against the scandals Michael Jackson was accused of, but on account of extensive family interviews and court cases, no one to this day is sure of what happened [8])-Walt Disney's GraveThis is another argument which I expect my opponent to use, and an argument I would expect from if someone does not wholly understand Cryonic Preservation. What they do, is they cryonically preserve the head of the patient - not the body. This prevents "information-theoretic death."[9] (more on this on my final source, found below). So, I do not contest that Walt's body was cremated, buried, or what have you.[8] - http://www.nydailynews.com...[9] - http://www.alcor.org...