New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
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.
(14210 previous messages)
cantabb
- 01:14am Oct 2, 2003 EST (#
14211 of 14217)
fredmoore - 11:31pm Oct 1, 2003 EST (# 14209 of
14209)
Preposterous!
What else do you think I am, if NOT a forum
reader/participant ? An NYT employee ? Or GW ? Rice ? [Look up
'preposterous'. Keep your dictionary handy]
Responsibility is HARDLY the issue. The
issue is one of intent and you have clearly expressed your
intent to close this forum.
This is what really qualifies as "Preposterous."
What else is the issue if NOT 'responsibility' for your
posts and your claims ?
You keep forgetting that I made 2 suggestions to NYT: Move
it a non-science/political/conspiracy theories/kitchen sink
'forum, because it does NOT qualify as a "Science" forum,
or, to stop the continuing abuse of forum posting
privileges, shut it down.
And having failed in that intent the purpose
of your continuance is now in question.
That's really nonsense. Since you don't know what MY
'intent' was, how in the world can you speculate on whether or
not I have 'failed' in it ? What's this about "my
continuance.. now in question" ? You think rshows55's
"continuance" is perfectly legitimate ?
Besides, who in the world do you think you are to even pose
such a question ?
Post something about Missile Defence or
perhaps a KAEP (as an alternative to Missile Defense) and
show you can do the Science. You clearly have good logic
capability but for some freudian reason are failing to use
that talent to its best advantage.
Spare us your arm-chair psychoanalysis ! You're NOT
qualified !
Didn't you notice what I've been doing here for the past 2
weeks (NOT 2+ years) ? I've been addressing questions
and comments from you (from immediately after my first post)
and others. And, asking rshow55 to tell me what specifically
he think he has neen doing here and what has he accomplished.
Further, your continual, self aggrandising
harrassment of Rshow is no more and no less effective a
means of occupying YOURSELF than Mme LaFarge's knitting was
of occupying herself as she pursued her silent enjoyment of
revenge.
Did you know what Madame LaFarge was said to have really
done ? Read it.
"self-aggrandising harassment of Rshow": Does it make any
sense ? Asking the poster to substantiate his claims and to
focus (instead of burdening the forum with more
self-referencing inanities), "a harassment" ? Perhaps to YOU,
the defender of this abuse and the status quo !
Do you, as his supporter and apparent admirer, know what he
has been doing and what has he accomplished on (and via) this
forum ? Since he can't focus and explain, may be you can --
particularly when you appear to have understood his
contributions and appreciate them !
IMHO the analogy is perfectly apt.
Read it FIRST before you make a comment.
You want revenge on Rshow because he will
not yield to your will that he should post the way YOU think
is fit and proper. You may as well be knitting .... as your
continual vituperative questions are just as effective.
"[R]evenge" ? For what ? You must not think through before
you post !
While you and others have been participating in his
overly-simplistic digressions, I've at least pressed him to
define what he thinks he has been doing ["checking" and the
rest he does] and what has he accomplished, in relation to his
claims ? While you seem to understand what he's doing here, he
says he now feels the pressure. As his loyal collaborator
says, cryptically as ever, "It got understood and exposed,"
while you're still busy carrying water for him.
If you actually read my posts in context you
would see that I try to steer Rshow into more rational and
fruitful channels. What I see is just the opposite. You're
welcome to delude yourself, as he does.
Like yourself, Rshow too has some scientific
and in his case
(6 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|