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 (14961 previous messages)

cantabb - 08:18am Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 14962 of 14968)

fredmoore - 08:12am Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 14960 of 14961)

Cantabbelle Rap: ( As sung by Cantabb him/her self.)

>>> Gunna tell a story yes yo heard it before-- Mere verbiage -- dismissed galore: May be "reasons" that sound "logical" to you – and that doesn't say or amount to much, does it ? One can STILL 'switch' between perspectives on THE SAME specific issue, focused, make a rational insane. This gobbledygook doesn't even make much sense. And, why worry ? Perhaps it shows in Not quite a perverse way "ordinary .. human behavior" does go astray ! Are you still imagining your teen-year "fights" ? You've got me so cut up I could punch out your lights. Couldn't I? No coincidence Fredmoore is on topic Thanks to Will, Blue, Gisterme not my silly myopic call the pressure, a service to the forum , yes entropic if I try to leave this barn yard behind. you're NOT talking about being "assigned" to do it here on NYT's MD forum , are you blind? You think other "fights" don't happen ? You gonna tell us RIGHT again ? Don't tell me to stop I just love bein' a pain. Anything to do with MD science ? Specifically ? Or, are you re-visiting your Granny down in mississippi with that teen year fightin'? Still re-living your teen-year fightin' ? Ahem, Ahem, Ahem, Ahem, Ahem, Ahem, Ahem, Ahem, Ahem.

The barnyard/schoolyard is here, I see !

"Irregardless" of the things in South Africa ?

fredmoore - 08:26am Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 14963 of 14968)

KAEP is the only sane, technologically progressive method for creating national and global defence. If all nations are working together for the same goals as partners there will be no need for missile defence:

An effective KAEP (Kyoto Alternative Energy Protocol) would link all countries

1. In a 10 year plan

2. With countries providing funds on a percentage of GDP basis ... up to .5% by mutual agreement.

3. For an international research and implementation program for: A. Converting one major power station in every city over 5 million people to dry rock geothermal. B. Developing and implementing Thermoelectric fabrics (eg polythiophene) for urban and agricultural power generation. C. Developing space based solar collectors and microwave transmission of power from space D. Terminating every stormwater and major farm runoff in an engineered wetland in order to conserve land based EMERGY in riverine catchments - from where it originates. This avoids the localised and catastrophic build up of energy at coastal boundaries around the planet, which is what we perceive as Climate Change.

cantabb - 08:43am Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 14964 of 14968)

fredmoore - 08:26am Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 14963 of 14963)

KAEP is the only sane, technologically progressive method for creating national and global defence. If all nations are working together for the same goals as partners there will be no need for missile defence:

An effective KAEP (Kyoto Alternative Energy Protocol) would link all countries

1. In a 10 year plan

2. With countries providing funds on a percentage of GDP basis ... up to .5% by mutual agreement.

3. For an international research and implementation program for: A. Converting one major power station in every city over 5 million people to dry rock geothermal. B. Developing and implementing Thermoelectric fabrics (eg polythiophene) for urban and agricultural power generation. C. Developing space based solar collectors and microwave transmission of power from space D. Terminating every stormwater and major farm runoff in an engineered wetland in order to conserve land based EMERGY in riverine catchments - from where it originates. This avoids the localised and catastrophic build up of energy at coastal boundaries around the planet, which is what we perceive as Climate Change.

From schoolyard/barnyard to somewhat on technology ? Quite a jump !

"Irregardless," How does it relate to MD, as defined in the header ?

rshow55 - 08:53am Oct 14, 2003 EST (# 14965 of 14968)
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.

For a while this morning, I was worried about my internet connection - couldn't get connected to NYT or some other things - though I could get google . . . I'm glad to be reconnected.

A lot of postings - and visitors I value very much - Almarst and Gisterme have been on since I last posted. (14929-30 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.8fnUb7dBO7g.2427444@.f28e622/16641 )

A big thing I notice is how fast this board is moving.

Almost 1000 posts since Sept 26th .

These posts - from way back then still seem good to me:

. 14000-14004 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.8fnUb7dBO7g.2427444@.f28e622/15706 .

I've got some catching up to do.

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