It could just as well be proof of their stupidity.

Hold on there, now you're saying they're stupid, instead of saying they're scammers. Is it possible that you simply don't like the concept and are making up reasons that support your feeling?

To directly address your concerns, I'm reading through the extended FAQs.[1]
First off, I have to admit that what I thought I read was Cryonics Institute being based where they are due to low geological risk. However, it seems I read that about Alcor Life Extension Foundation, which is the other non-profit Cryonics preservation service in the US. They detailed their location decision here: [2] Summarizing, it's because of very low risk of natural disaster, availability of major airport facilities, favorable weather (no winter blockages), and low crime. See the link for extended information.

Doing some quick research, it seems that in terms of seismic activity, Michigan is even safer than Arizona.[3,4] You mention geological stability is your territory, so I'll defer to your opinion on that.

Why not the North of Canada or the center of Australia?

I would think the main reasons are: The North of Canada is hard to get to, and frequently inaccessible, which is a problem when time is of the essence. Australia is not populated enough: People from the USA would find it hard to get to, and there may not be enough people in Australia to warrant a Cryonics center there. Australia's laws might also create a hurdle, although I'm not too familiar with that.

As a final note, I'd suggest interested people have a look around through the public information. All financials are public,[5] the cryopreservation methods used are well detailed,[6] and for every person cryopreserved there is a case report available, detailing both the things that went well and the things that need improvement.[7]

Cryonics is a thing. The people involved are intelligent, and are working to give the preserved patients the best chance they can at a future. Cryopreservation seems odd at first glance, raising a lot of concerns that need to be addressed. Luckily, these have indeed been addressed. Have a google through the information available, and perhaps you'll find your view shifting!


[1]
Cryonics: A basic introduction
Cryonics: A basic introduction (Continued)
Cryonics: A basic introduction (Continued 2)
Cryonics: Why don't we?
Cryonics Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

[2] Why Scottsdale?
[3] Arizona Seismic Hazard Map
[4] Michigan Seismic Hazard Map
[5] Cryonics Institute Financial Statements
[6] Outline of CI Cryopreservation procedures
[7] The Cryonic Institute's 110th Patient

Cryonics Institute is a non-profit, and every employee is required to be signed up for preservation themselves as well. The choice of location for CI is not just politics. They chose the location in a geologically very stable area, to get the highest likelihood of long term preservation. Politically, you also want to be in a stable environment, preventing you from going to just any country that has nice legislation at the moment. In any case, the first points I mentioned bear repeating. All cryonics providers in the world, including CI, are non-profits. Also, for CI, employees need to be signed up with CI to work there, meaning they have to have a stake in making sure everything actually works as intended. This, to me, is proof of their integrity.

r*2*pi*2.4*10^9=299792458 gives r = 0.0198806048 meters, or three quarters of an inch. The fan blades wouldn't be of infinite mass though: only the part with the radius of 0.0198806048 meters would be, but that is of infinitesimal size. Interesting to note is that outside this radius, the blades would be going backwards in time, and below, forward (according to the relativity formula, which may or may not make sense above light speed). We can't be sure of these results though, because if we calculate pi by dividing the circumference of this fan by its diameter, we would run into trouble, because the length contraction would make our circumference seem complex... Wait, how was this related to a Rubik's cube again?