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 (16478 previous messages)

cantabb - 09:04am Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16479 of 16492)

lchic - 09:01am Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16477 of 16477)

Cantabb .... logic ... of course there was logic, but you missed the punch line

Must have been the 'generic' kind -- your personal brand.

Punchline: If you say so !

"ultimately TRUTH outs" : Sometimes, garbage in, garbage out !

cantabb - 09:07am Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16480 of 16492)

lchic - 09:03am Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16478 of 16479)

Don't 'look' for the punch line -- you won't see it but If you keep going round and round the loop IT WILL creep up on you

:)

Sorry, was never good at faux-Zen cryptography !

"ultimately TRUTH outs" Ultimately, yes ! If you can sit, wait and pray hard and long enough !

lchic - 09:08am Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16481 of 16492)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

so what were you good at ....

rshow55 - 09:12am Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16482 of 16492)
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.

"Rote machine"

Rote learning - memorization - is a kind of learning that has its place - and in some places - it is indispensible. No apology about that. I'm convinced that in a lot of areas - the most common things - those things that are statistically most important - should be identified for learners - and when those things are frequent enough ( like the most frequent 100 words in english - which make up almost 45% of the words used in text ) they should be memorized.

We need to learn what fits.

I think the basics of disciplined beauty should be memorized.

http://www.mrshowalter.net/DBeauty.html

Along with some rhymes by lchic

9236 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.9Qjzbxm8UmW.1128032@.f28e622/10763

Adults have secrets, lies and fictions

Live in their world, of contradictions

But if things go bad

and knock about

Folks get together

And work it out

Human beings ( especially children, but not only children ) need ideas condensed and packaged in memorable form.

Lcic is "the best mind I've never been near" - and she's especially good at that condensation.

lchic - 09:13am Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16483 of 16492)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

Rupert Murdock's guys in The Australian seem to be backing Bush for re-election

rshow55 - 09:15am Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16484 of 16492)
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.

To preserve necessary fictions - tactful face to face discourse can be indispensible - so that things can be worked out with minimum disruption (especially minimum involuntary disruption) of the fictions that are important to the people involved.

Anonymity has uses.

Specificity does, too.

There is no contradiction involved - but tact can be useful, and practical.

"Obvious? " Sure. Important, too. Diplomats need better technical knowledge about exception handling when dealing with these things.

This thread would be a good source of text and examples to show things involved with that.

More Messages Recent Messages (8 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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