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.

jorian319 - 01:22pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15955 of 15983)

Best one yet since "Important subjects are frequently interesting"

Hold the phone! That "Solutions must solve, and the definition of "solve" must be agreed upon by those for whom the effort is important" was a rip directly from my caricature post. The fact that RS quoted it is just an indicator of how clueless he is.

cantabb - 01:27pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15956 of 15983)

fredmoore - 12:48pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15952 of 15953)

See my post #15939 for your reply.

See my response: cantabb - 12:23pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15949 of 15954), and here's the link for your convenience, and as usual, "irregardless," of your veld-views :

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?1@13.bc20bm2LTbH.128713@.f28e622/17664

NOTE: Also, refer to ALL my previous posts to you !

Have fun in the veld school-yard-barnyard !

bluestar23 - 01:27pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15957 of 15983)

Your sense of humour is much appreciated in these trying times, Jorian....

bluestar23 - 01:34pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15958 of 15983)

"That "Solutions must solve, and the definition of "solve" must be agreed upon by those for whom the effort is important" was a rip directly from my caricature post."

Really..? Showalter just copied you..?

jorian319 - 01:37pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15959 of 15983)

See for yourself! (second sentence)

http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bc20bm2LTbH.128713@.f28e622/17648

I've remarked before that Robert routinely mistakes parody for profundity.

cantabb - 02:18pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15960 of 15983)

On MD, a collection of Washingtomn Post articles:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/nation/specials/nationalsecurity/nationalmissiledefense/

cantabb - 02:22pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15961 of 15983)

A blind man leading the disabled in a fog, at night on a mountain by the sea {or a Great Lake).....

I think he has better chance of finding "TRUTH" !

rshow55 - 03:07pm Oct 30, 2003 EST (# 15962 of 15983)
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.

Some profound facts are very "routine" - like the fact that essentially every "reader of the NYT" will share knowledge of 50,000+ words - and 100,000+ definitions ( measured by sampling ) - people sort out a lot that is pretty useful.

I don't have to be especially smart to sort out a lot. In some basic ways, we're all the same

There's an interesting passage from Fundamental Neuroanatomy by Walle J. H. Nauta and Michael Feirtag . . . in 13900-01 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.bc20bm2LTbH.128713@.f28e622/15603

How is order possible? In our minds and societies, it can't be a matter of strict genetic determination - the neural organization is far too complex to specify with the amount of genetic code that people carry. And it can't be magic, either.

Some very powerful self-organization is going on. In essentially all people. And it is a lot better than the results of "monkeys with typewriters."

- - If you ask "how does disorder happen" - well, human beings sometimes have to work at it.

There's a lot of work of that kind going on here.

People do have an excellent chance of finding truths that matter. Sometimes even new ones.

(21 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense