New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Nazi engineer and Disney space advisor Wernher Von Braun helped give us rocket science. Today, the legacy of military aeronautics has many manifestations from SDI to advanced ballistic missiles. Now there is a controversial push for a new missile defense system. What will be the role of missile defense in the new geopolitical climate and in the new scientific era?

lunarchick - 02:42am Oct 2, 2000 EDT (#360 of 396)
Barrier Reef - not the place4 - NUKE SUBs !

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/cgi/search?.db=museum&.app=museum&.path=%2Fmuseum&.search-again=1&query=missiles&search_option=or&submit=start+search

lunarchick - 02:44am Oct 2, 2000 EDT (#361 of 396)
Barrier Reef - not the place4 - NUKE SUBs !

http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/amdipl_4/roland.html

lunarchick - 02:47am Oct 2, 2000 EDT (#362 of 396)
Barrier Reef - not the place4 - NUKE SUBs !

http://www.nisbco.org/biblio_A-H.htm

lunarchick - 02:48am Oct 2, 2000 EDT (#363 of 396)
Barrier Reef - not the place4 - NUKE SUBs !

http://www.wagingpeace.org/sf/sunflower_9907.html

rshowalt - 05:18am Oct 2, 2000 EDT (#364 of 396)

Lunarchick asks why this information is not being discussed in the late night talk shows.

lunarchick 10/2/00 1:09am

There's a good reason. Still today, writing in a forum lacks, by miles, the clout of the same words, when printed in a newspaper that has subjected them to editorial judgement. Properly so.

If some of the dialog in these forums were not only cited in the paper (which might be a good idea in itself) but printed there, journalists, according to standard usages, could and would notice.

Now, according to these same usages, they really can't consider anything written here "valid news."

I think some of this Missile Defense thread, and some parts of other threads as well, would merit printing. That's not my call, of course. It is THE NEW YORK TIMES' call. It does seem clear that the TIMES has a right to print these forums, and, after a moderate amount of checking, and some permissions, could do so without lowering the journalistic standards people trust it to have.

There's a distinction, from the play A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS that goes "I don't recommend him. .... I point him out." Printing words from the forums could be done with the same provisos, and properly should be, unless and until the TIMES commits itself to some usual usages involving asking questions and checking facts.

No recommendation from the TIMES would be needed for the printing of forum dialog to constitute a very large promotion in the visability of that dialog. If some of this thread were printed in the paper, these pieces would be elevated to the status that journalists must consider, and check. That would be a big change from current circumstances, and the status conventions that now apply to these same words.

Then, but only then, would it be justifiable to ask talk show hosts, and other shapers of opinion, to risk their own credibility by dealing with the points made here.

How about it?

If you even considered it, you'd have some reporters calling me, asking questions I'd like to have asked. I can demonstrate, with a good deal of support from specific instances, that it is hard to get an idea or fact checked, just because it is clearly written in one of these forums. In my own view, it should not be as hard as it is.

kalter.rauch - 06:45am Oct 2, 2000 EDT (#365 of 396)
Earth vs <^> <^> <^>

They're going to print stuff that either reassures the public or confirms its fears, enough to ensure continued docility, anyway......

That counts me out......

You know how it feels after hyperventilating......that's how I want to leave the reader. The more extreme the adjective, the more endorphins or neo-corticotropoids are released in the nervous system. I hope someday there is a "Subliminalize" button that automatically performs structural or even semantic "enhancements" within a user selectable level of complexity...word, sentence, paragraph, or All. What the eye sees peripherally as it lingers over a sensational point must have a lot to do with "convincing" or otherwise influencing the reader......

......it might be "wrong" to hotwire the conscious without a highly visible warning preamble on any written product containing subliminal content expressly intended to influence the reader.

lunarchick - 09:27am Oct 2, 2000 EDT (#366 of 396)
Barrier Reef - not the place4 - NUKE SUBs !

Warning: this product is an emotional hazard!

Wonder if such a notice is sent as a card via interflora-bunch, by an agressor, prior to their dumping a nuclear bomb, and if so, to whom would it be addressed.

lunarchick - 07:18pm Oct 2, 2000 EDT (#367 of 396)
Barrier Reef - not the place4 - NUKE SUBs !

Waste storage: Not a problem ... dump it on the 'third' world .. where people have NO say: http://www.stuff.co.nz/inl/index/0,1008,343532a1601,FF.html

Plans to utilise the underground cave system of Australia were dropped - The Australain public said NO!

rshowalt - 07:23pm Oct 2, 2000 EDT (#368 of 396)

For what people might be willing to pay for the storage, with risks as they look, a 3d world country might well say YES.

If people do arithmetic with their risks, waste disposal is a tough problem, but NOT an impossible one.

lunarchick - 08:05pm Oct 2, 2000 EDT (#369 of 396)
Barrier Reef - not the place4 - NUKE SUBs !

American/RussianEconomy http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=234594

(27 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense