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.

cantabb - 05:54pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14913 of 14915)

lchic - 01:50pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14885 of 14904)

Meaty subject ... TRUTH .... (Cantabb asked for more explanation)

I asked because of your ‘tag-line’ and your various references to 'truth' in your posts. Also wanted to know this in light of what you think was ‘exposed’ and ‘understood’.

The meaning of my words on truth will vary according to the outlook of any virtual reader - readers bring themselves to the page.

Truth is in the eye of the beholder ?

The examples you cited refer to what people think is THE truth (eye of the beholder stuff), and repeating the same personal view, unsupported by the facts, over and over again [“Loop Test”]. Fundamentals of Propaganda ! Just repeating a flawed thing often enough doesn’t make it true. Doesn’t work in an open society.

That truth needs to be morally forcing implies that lies - or failure to accept findings that can be implemented as improved process - are a dis-service to mankind and may result in unnecessary deaths.

Opinions are not facts. “Truth” does NOT come out upon request, as $$ from an ATM. No one person has the custody of THE “truth’ !

You might want to discuss and above with your partner, rshow55. In your next 'reflections'.

lchic - 02:02pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14886 of 14904)

You may want to follow what “Showalter” does. I do think my way – following some one is NOT a part of my way.

Cantabb -- why not meet up with Cooper -- as did Showalter.

For WHAT ? Not interested, as I already told rshow55 when he asked me to call him !

Showalter travelled from Madison to Chicago to meet this guy ... and met him in the well lit public venue of an Art Gallery Setting.

Cooper said 'he was from Chicago' ..... but .... Mazza recently said that Showalter had caused Cooper to have to travel to Chicago --- and these guys say they communicate additional to the board.

Which raises the question was Cooper or Mazza lying?

After this meeting Cooper said he would NOT post on the MD board - again. He's back.

That’s Cooper for you: insists that he “ignores” me, but seems bothered enough to ‘advise’ others to follow his recommendation that did NOT work for him before, and does NOT work for him now !

cantabb - 06:00pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14914 of 14915)

rshow55 - 02:16pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14887 of 14904)

The relationship between me and Cooper, such as it is, doesn't seem very important to me - but it illustrates some of key problems - that are worth discussing on this board - involving very different weights applied to notions such as "the obligation to take the word of a poster." ……..I'm surprised by Cooper's emotional response. The pretense that "nobody willfuly misleads" on this threads seems far-fetched in the extreme.

Please spare us the gory details. It’s already available on the Forum and I’ve read quite a bit from him and you on it.

We've got things to sort out where The New York Times has some thinking and changing to do.

That’s ridiculous. It’s YOU and you alone who has to do “some thinking and changing.”

NOT others. On what basis ?

lchic - 02:23pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14888 of 14904)

Didn’t rshow55 once put his own photograph on the Forum ? Am I mistaken ?

lchic - 02:39pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14893 of 14904)

K this forum is about 'truth' ... who has 'truth' ... who uses 'truth' and who puts a finger on the RED button!

Showalter talks about 'truth' and working 'in clear' (with truth).

But “truth” on what ? It's also the 'truth' that he hasn’t said what has he been working on. And his logic on any topic seems based on his opinions, NOT facts.

A major reason - 'quality of decision making'.

You can NOT make a decision unless you have ‘the facts’, and you are capable of analyzing them rationally.

rshow55 - 02:42pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14894 of 14904)

Statistics is about guesses - logic is about things assumed to be true.

With a little added work - this thread would be a fine corpus for showing how.

The “little added work” is: What do you think you’ve been working on for the past 3 years ? You’ve not specified it.

rshow55 - 02:47pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14895 of 14904)

Assumptions are a lot like guesses - - and they have to be checked - usually in ways that are partly statistical. …….. People who know enough general information to enjoy a Star Trek movie really know a lot of the right answers. But they've repressed them - and need to be clearer - for reasons of safety.

Even by the “standards” you cite here, your work and your approach both flunk miseralbly.

rshow55 - 03:19pm Oct 13, 2003 EST (# 14901 of 14904)

We need to sort them out - and even the glorious New York Times may have to do some adjusting.

Yeah, NYT should ask you to focus and NOT keep abusing the privilege.

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense