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.

bluestar23 - 01:35am Nov 3, 2003 EST (# 16282 of 16303)

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/deflection_asteroids_020214.html

Space-Based Missile Defense is now necessary for anti-Asteroid Protection...

bluestar23 - 01:39am Nov 3, 2003 EST (# 16283 of 16303)

From the above:

"Earth is little more than a sitting duck in a cosmic shooting gallery, the scientists tell us. But that doesn't mean we can't shoot back. If an asteroid is ever found to have our planet in its sights, a carefully aimed missile can simply knock the rock off course.

There's one little problem. It's hard to deflect something that's coming right at you.

Any boxer understands this. A slight bit of energy applied to a punch in the right way can turn a roundhouse into a harmless glancing blow. But if you try and stop an upper cut by driving your chin directly into it, you'll go down for the count.

Claudio Maccone at the Center for Astrodynamics in Turin, Italy, has a boxer's eye for asteroids, and he's developed what he claims is the best plan for protecting Earth.

Put missiles in space, Maccone says, and hit the asteroids at an angle."

So now you can see the Missile Defense is necessary for the very protection of Planet Earth, something the weird "fruitcake" lchic (and her insane friend) thinks is so all-fired important....but I have posted the real answer first...

bluestar23 - 01:40am Nov 3, 2003 EST (# 16284 of 16303)

Save the World with MD, lchic....no asteroids...

bluestar23 - 01:49am Nov 3, 2003 EST (# 16285 of 16303)

"Sees this thought-transfer is necessary within National Boundaries ..."

No, it isn't...just post on topic like I do...

fredmoore - 03:25am Nov 3, 2003 EST (# 16286 of 16303)

In can feel a fredmoorism coming on. Here it comes .....:

There was a promotion for a new toilet paper at the local supermarket. If you could make up the winning name for the new product then you would receive a years free supply.

Well, Cantabb buys some and takes it home with his contest entry form tucked under his wing.

The next day he is talking to the checkout, who asks him what he decided to call the toilet paper. 'Rshow' he said. The girl looked perplexed and asked why.

"Well it's very resilient, very slippery and takes no sh&t from me !"

Then Bluey enters the store the next day and he said he named it 'Lchic' toilet paper .... for the same reasons!

You've got to love this Forum ... eh Vladmir?

Addendum: To his inevitable 'Chicken Sh$t' (CS) reply I refer Cantabb to post #15939 for my standard response.

YAWN! in advance.

cantabb - 05:39am Nov 3, 2003 EST (# 16287 of 16303)

lchic - 11:20pm Nov 2, 2003 EST (# 16269 of 16286)

[to bluestar23]: blue - NEVER presume!

ONLY lchic & rshow are licensed to do this.

Very useful in their search for “truth”: They ONLY know what to “presume,” when and how.

The leader thinks “we” (rshow + lchic; or the entire humanity) “can do a better job of finding truth,” and his 'World Asset' thinks (sipping the "syrup") “ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation.”

"Truth dispensers" !

(16 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense