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.

rshow55 - 09:27am Jul 11, 2003 EST (# 12939 of 12942)
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.

Here are references connected to 1130-1 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.gUjbbVp1oQK.529962@.f28e622/1437 :

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md2000s/md2084.htm

3871 http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md3000s/md3869.htm

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md4000s/md4617.htm

5902 http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5900.htm is quoted in

1130 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.gUjbbVp1oQK.529962@.f28e622/1437 cites these references

rshowalter - 10:31am Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5878 http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5872.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5879.htm

MD3871 almarst-2001 5/14/01 10:32pm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md3000s/md3869.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md3000s/md3872.htm

" It is interesting you decided to dig back into the events of WWII. I never intended to go that far, but if you will, here what I believe.

" The WWII was all about one thing - the energy resources - the coal and oil. Remember, that was an age of the heavy industry and electricity - the source and the key to the prosperity of a nation.

rshowalter - 07:21pm Jun 23, 2001 EST (#5903 of 5906) http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5897.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5904.htm

MD4524 rshowalter 6/5/01 9:08pm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md4000s/md4522.htm

MD4611 rshowalter 6/8/01 1:58pm MD4612 rshowalter 6/8/01 1:59pm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md4000s/md4610.htm

" In some other areas -- solar energy and global warming control, for instance - we face large scale but simple problems. With loose tolerances, and many different ways to proceed on many of the technical details involved.

" The estimate of all the conventional oil that there ever was or ever will be is less than the amount of sunlight that hits the earth in one day. http://www.oilcrisis.com/debate/oilcalcs.htm Exactly the kind of "wing it" approach Rumsfeld just proposed for MD might actually work for solar energy -- we need to find ways to use very extensive areas available on earth -- and the equatorial oceans look like a good place. For "space available" we might SOLVE essential military and economic problems for the whole world -- MD4613 rshowalter 6/8/01 2:13pm MD4614 rshowalter 6/8/01 2:14pm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md4000s/md4610.htm

" Actually doable. By engineers and institutions that have been struggling with missile defense, and failing.

" And more important, just in military terms, than a limited missile defense could ever be.

This isn't just something the US could do -- Russia, or the EU, or Japan or even Australia, could probably do it, too.

Other possibilities? Sure. The point is, this looks doable, and could remove some essential reasons for war, and make the world more hopeful and prosperous, too.

Lchic 12189 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.gUjbbVp1oQK.529962@.f28e622/13826

Browser : Economies of scale energy

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=Economies+of+scale+energy&btnG=Google+Search&meta= NON-DEPLETABLE ENERGY SOURCES -- Energy which is not obtained from depletable energy sources.

http://www.consumerenergycenter.org/glossary/n.html Mexico - Renewable energy needs 20year PLAN

Renewable energy is competing with other sources that have already been wildly subsidized by government. Subsidies for conventional energy sources over the past five decades in decreasing order are: $272 billion for oil, $73 billion for natural gas, $68 billion for coal, $63 billion for hydro, $61 billion for nuclear. Now compare these huge amounts with $27 billion total for all wind, geothermal and solar technologies combined. Looking at these figures, its not surprising we have little renewable energy (except hydro, which was strongly subsidize

rshow55 - 09:29am Jul 11, 2003 EST (# 12940 of 12942)
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.

Lchic's reference continues:

Now compare these huge amounts with $27 billion total for all wind, geothermal and solar technologies combined. Looking at these figures, its not surprising we have little renewable energy (except hydro, which was strongly subsidized). http://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/guest_columns/guest06-06-02.htm

It seems PLANNING and COOPERATION are necessary to get ENERGY to people at LOWEST COST

Some of that work is simple - if problems are taking in order. When that's done - the idea of an optimal solution - as stable as the railroad solution of a steel wheel on a steel rail - looks possible - and very cheap compared to alternatives.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense