New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.

lchic - 05:58pm May 10, 2003 EST (# 11569 of 11584)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

GU - How long will Robert Mugabe keep his grip on Zimbabwe? Andrew Meldrum was online to talk about Zimbabwe. http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?50@@.4a911e6a

Report | http://www.guardian.co.uk/zimbabwe/0,2759,181131,00.html

rshow55 - 06:08pm May 10, 2003 EST (# 11570 of 11584)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

Manj http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.gWVhaqzx8Fm.0@.f28e622/13159

Plenty to worry about. And the NK situation is cause for concern. All the same, whatever happens with the North Koreans, it won't be

the "final" chapter of this sad case called humanity ....

A major nuclear mishap between the Russians and Americans could end the world (though if you remember how much more competent our military forces are than NASA - you may not worry about that.)

Three years ago, I was desperately worried about that.

I think such a world-ending nuclear exchange is less likely than it used to be.

If the North Koreans set off some nukes, and we retaliate - that will be a wrenching tragedy.

But the world will survive, and odds are .

Maybe after such a thing - there will be enough motivation to get rid of nukes.

We ought not to need such a tragedy to accomplish that, but we may.

rshow55 - 06:11pm May 10, 2003 EST (# 11571 of 11584)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

This is well worth reading. Checking matters - Times Reporter Who Resigned Leaves Long Trail of Deception http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/11/national/11PAPE.html

Mr. Raines, who referred to the Blair episode as a ``terrible mistake,'' said that in addition to correcting the record so badly corrupted by Mr. Blair, he planned to assign a task force of newsroom employees to identify lessons for the newspaper.

That could do great good. Properly handled, response could be a major contribution to the whole culture.

There is no alternative to checking. Police departments and banks that work well know it.

Checking can increase credibility. Blair decieved, and that was serious - but the issues Blair decieved about, though numerous, were not terribly serious in this sense - little of national import hinged on facts he stole of fabricated.

Krugman says some things which, if true, are very serious.

That do make a difference in the life of the nation - and of the world. And that do raise significant questions about credibility (and not only the credibility of reporters.)

I don't doubt Krugman. But are the points he makes checked?

If they were, people who don't reflexively defer to Princeton professors or NYT columnists might pay more attention to them - as I believe they should.

lchic - 06:20pm May 10, 2003 EST (# 11572 of 11584)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Carbon Dioxide emission

Rich countries consume a disproportionate amount of energy and natural resources, says a new World Bank publication, the Little Green Data Book 2003. The report details various environmental indicators for countries, regions and income groups. It points out that the 15% or so of the world's population living in high-income countries are responsible for half of the carbon dioxide (the principal greenhouse gas behind global warming) released by man-made sources. That is partly because the rich world also generates much of the world's economic activity. America, for example, uses 16 times as much energy per person as India.

see chart

http://www.economist.com/markets/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1769660&marketErr=1

lchic - 06:34pm May 10, 2003 EST (# 11573 of 11584)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Communication - buckytube ...

http://www.economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1763552

ends .... ""the reason for getting excited about Nantero is not so much the present as the future. Unlike silicon, which is pushing against its physical limitations, carbon-nanotube technology is in its infancy. Greg Schmergel, Nantero's boss, says that within the next few years the firm's engineers may be able to achieve data densities of a trillion bits per square centimetre (more than 1,000 times that available on existing RAM) and it will be possible to read those memories 100 times faster than can be done at the moment. The days of silicon-based memory may be numbered.

(11 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense