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 (15055 previous messages)

gisterme - 04:40am Oct 15, 2003 EST (# 15056 of 15067)

"...You do NOT know what I write, But that has NOT prevented you from making a baseless speculation. A speculation is as baseless as your appeal to Forum readers. That IS the "problem."..."

You're such a diplomat cantabb.

gisterme - 04:45am Oct 15, 2003 EST (# 15057 of 15067)

"...Seeing people blown into pieces by mines -- years after warfare -- is a strong case to NOT use them anywhere on earth..."

Agreed. Why don't you go to Afghanistan or Laos or somewhere and help dig some up, lchic?

pjfocke - 05:34am Oct 15, 2003 EST (# 15058 of 15067)

showalter, you may remember me. I worked to help you establish your ideas because I believe in letting people at least prove they are wrong before they are disregarded. You were given a chance, with the backing of a real professor who didn't think of you as "crazy", and were in a unique position to prove yourself. You did not succeed. You disappeared. Then you came back with lots of talk about security clearance, etc. Okay. I took it with a grain of salt. Maybe you were scared, maybe it wasn't time, but what it comes down to is the fact that you can't prove what you are trying to say. If there is biological inductance, prove it. You can't prove it by wasting time on this thread. If you really wanted to prove it you would clearly spend more time working on the ins and outs of proving your theory, as the molecular biology and neuroscience behind it are not that difficult. You would also not forget the people who have been most interested and who are positioning themselves in the right spots to test that theory, as you seem to have done. Nobody who has a lot of experience in neuroscience thiks that biological inductance exists, and if you're math proves it, and your experiment in a box verifies it, then it shouldn't be a secret anymore. Showalter, you know who I am. I miss our talks and seeing you and learning from you, but man, WHAT ARE YOU DOING? This is absurd. This is a challenge for you to do something more interesting with yourself than waste it on this thread. This thread is a distraction, and if someone WERE trying to keep you down, this would be the perfect way to do it. An abyss of crap. Get out of this black hole and prove it, or shutup.

More Messages Recent Messages (9 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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