New York Times Forums
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] 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.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (14296 previous messages)

rshow55 - 03:11pm Oct 4, 2003 EST (# 14297 of 14302)
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.

We need common ground to agree or disagree clearly about anything much. I know Cantabb may dispute the relevance of these basic pieces to this board - but there's much discussion of discourse going on here. Both are short.

How a Story is Shaped. http://www.fortunecity.com/lavendar/ducksoup/555/storyshape.html

A Communication Model http://www.worldtrans.org/TP/TP1/TP1-17.HTML

Especially A Communication Model http://www.worldtrans.org/TP/TP1/TP1-17.HTML

Does Cantabb , or anybody else, have objections to the validity of these pieces - in terms of the generalizations they make.

To discuss the "swirl of language" - agreement here would help.

lchic - 03:28pm Oct 4, 2003 EST (# 14298 of 14302)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Here's a 'power' question

The concept of 'Empire America'?

Looking at the straight totalled number of voter in the 2000 election http://www.wittendal.com/usa1.htm it seems so many americans were simply 'out to lunch' on that day -- and/or had their franchaise to vote withdrawn eliminating them a say in their democratic representation ... in the land of 'Liberty' and 'Freedom' ... why do so many have to endure 'internal exile'!? http://www.dogwoodcenter.org/references/Toppo00.html

Population USA 281,421,906 in 2000 census http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/census2000/usnav/usnav.htm

cantabb - 03:42pm Oct 4, 2003 EST (# 14299 of 14302)

rshow55 - 03:02pm Oct 4, 2003 EST (# 14295 of 14297)

Could you restate your questions?

Could you read any of my several posts in which I repeated them? Did you miss them each time ?

Lchic tells me that the board reads pretty well with your posts on "ignore" - and the fact is, your work hasn't been the only thing I've been concerned with. Though I do appreciate both the increased civility and the clarity of your posts this morning.

Tell your esteemed collaborator, lchic, that putting your head in the sand MIGHT work better for you. And her too !

MY "work" ? I just asked you 2 simple questions, over half a dozen times. And you have NOT been able to answer them : YET, you had many, many posts with tortured rationalizations, in addition to more than usual dose of irrelevancies.

Cantabb , you say I think I have an idea where the difficulty may lie.

Could you share your thoughts in a civil way? I don't promise to agree with them - or even attend to them, but I might. If you think I'm trying to do something impossible - or think the key difficulty is limitations of my own - you can say so - but please do so civilly.

You hasve demonstrated that you can not focus. And show no basic sense of logic.

Besides, your {or our] opinions are NOT fact, and just because you repeated the same a dozen time, your opinions don't become facts -- because of this exercise ! To use one of your analogies, GRINDING wheat anf chaff will get you some powder, neither pure wheat or pure chaff.

Hint: Don't sell it as 100% wheat !

You agree or NOT -- the least of my concerns.

We all have cognitive limits - but I'm not sure that all the cognitive limits under discussion are my own. I am sure that some subjects can't be taught to some people - beyond a point. http://www.mrshowalter.net/PiagetCognitiveLimits.htm

We ALL have our own limits [in any area]. Some have more than the others.

But you can't teach a guy unwilling to learn.

I think a lot of my postings yesterday worked well, starting with 14281 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.YnSVbfgeLNt.497126@.f28e622/15958 - and were on topic.

You might have thought so. lchic would have thought so too.

What else is new ?

More Messages Recent Messages (3 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense