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 - 02:02pm Oct 5, 2003 EST (# 14332 of 14369)
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.

Cantabb - I haven't got you on "ignore" exactly - but I am dealing with your (often boring) posts in a batched way. Looking for themes - motivations - patterns - counting cases. There are enough of them that one can look at what matters to you at the level of statistics -and discourse, too. Do loop tests to find consistencies. Wonder about what changes in the postings - and what doesn't.

There have been 182 posting "by Cantabb" since September 17th - - none before. http://www.mrshowalter.net/Cantabb_Srch_to10_4.htm

I think people at different stages Piaget discusses in The Moral Judgement of the Child might have different judgements on what Cantabb is doing - and how his work is and is not "cheating."

For myself - I think he's degrading himself and his employer - but his moral indignation makes it clear he disagrees.

cantabb - 02:04pm Oct 5, 2003 EST (# 14333 of 14369)

bluestar23 - 01:15pm Oct 5, 2003 EST (# 14328 of 14330)

And, they would do almost anything to, NOT answer simple questions ASKED.

Just see the exchange since Sept 17 -- NOW made easy by rshow55 collecting them in ONE link. Must thank rshow55 for the help !

rshow55 - 02:12pm Oct 5, 2003 EST (# 14334 of 14369)
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.

Is it cheating to form connections - make conclusions - and check them?

We're dealing with that basic issue - as it applies to the things discussed on this thread.

I think this article is worth several looks:

Leaks and the Courts: There's Law, but Little Order By ADAM LIPTAK http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/05/weekinreview/05LIPT.html

If they subpoenaed Mr. Novak, for instance, a court would very likely order him to testify.

Which is not to say he would comply. Reporters ordered to reveal their sources almost never do, on the theory that they and their colleagues would have little chance of persuading other sources to trust them if they did. They generally prefer to be held in contempt of court. Reporters have spent time in jail and publishers have paid substantial fines as a consequence.

What if the issue is an unwillingness of reporters to reveal who they are?

Is it cheating to form connections - make conclusions - and check them?

Is it cheating to look at things from different related points of view, for crosschecking?

Is it cheating to do enough work so that questions of logical structure, fact, weights, and team identification can be clarified - on missile defense, or any other subject?

If it is - then the press has an operationally near-total right to lie.

That's a subject that has been much discussed on this thread - and has concerned Almarst from the beginning - and me, too.

You can check that.

Such issues matter:

Ex-Minister Says Blair Knew Iraq Had No Banned Arms By WARREN HOGE http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/05/international/europe/05CND-BRIT.html

I've been arguing that effectual checking has been largely classified out of existence. Cantabb's tactics show an essential way in which that is done. Effectively prohibit crossreferencing or crosschecking - or construe it so narrowly that it cannot usefully be done.

bluestar23 - 02:14pm Oct 5, 2003 EST (# 14335 of 14369)

"NOW made easy by rshow55 collecting them in ONE link"

weird, eh...? but typical...soon you'll become V. Putin or someone appropriately nasty.....showalter has also hijacked a thread on Guardian Newspapers in Britain...thousands of posts...and not one from Anyone Other Than Showalter...he doesn't even need us, to tell the truth....he's mentally ill and must be removed from posting....

(34 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense