Threshold Utility Counteressay

Threshold Utility Counteressay

Threshold Utility Counteressay

Document transcript

ALTERNATIVE PERSPECTIVE

RE: THRESHOLDS UTILITY RESEARCH

SUMMARY:

Dr. Darling's recently-penned essay titled [REDACTED] contains some glaring omissions that I feel I must shine a light on.

Firstly, the entire premise of the essay is that the Quarry Threshold is beneficial to the Bureau, while the Mold is “actively hostile”, to use his words. We cannot determine the worth of these dimensions and their lifeforms using bureaucratic definitions.

Secondly, the Mold is much more beneficial than some rock. If the [REDACTED] creating the Mold were reconfigured in their purpose, the structures they could build would rival the greatest skyscrapers. The Mold’s resistance to various strains of disease we've attempted to introduce could be derived into [REDACTED].

Yes, admittedly, this application is more difficult than picking up a rock and gluing it to a wall, but I pause to wonder when the Bureau lost its eagerness for a challenge.

Refer to file 2-35-1863 for full report.