New York Times Forums
The New York Times

Job Market
Real Estate
New York Region
NYT Front Page
Readers' Opinions

Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Week in Review
Learning Network
Book a Trip
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
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 (16531 previous messages)

cantabb - 06:06pm Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16532 of 16548)

jorian319 - 05:40pm Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16530 of 16531)

That's a great point, cantabb - written eloquence begins and ends with the writer's precise idea of the effect he's trying to have upon the reader.


I think Rshow's been 'fishing' without a net or a hook. The ideas in a "ton of half-baked ideas" are still half-baked -- same applies to 'ten' tons of them (even if unloaded on the forum a few dozen times)!

bluestar23 - 06:13pm Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16533 of 16548)

Well, Showalter's typing on "borrowed time" from now on....his "audience " will disappear....

cantabb - 06:16pm Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16534 of 16548)

'twisting slowly in the wind.....' ?

[We've not heard a bleat or anything from the barnyard -- yet. I know it's coming ]

cantabb - 06:17pm Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16535 of 16548)

You know he was "hoping for" it...

rshow55 - 07:42pm Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16536 of 16548)
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.

re: - Jorian comments that I'm fishing - and it is a fact that I'm a little taken aback - I was expecting this board to be archived this morning - had my mind adjusted to that. Found that a pleasant prospect. A clean way for me to move on .

But I did hope that the basic point of would interst some people - maybe Jorian most of all.

The standard of "new, surprising and different" is a vital standard - a news standard. For some other purposes - and some of the most important purposes - the question "what happens most frequently?" is an important question.

Jorian uses words superbly - but all the same - the 200 most common words - probably less than .2% of the words he knows and uses and judges well - are still more than half his word count.

( I'm guessing - but with a good basis - they are more than half of practically every good writer's word count. )

Some common things are very important - and when problems go wrong with monotonous regularity - even for "obvious" reasons - getting improved understandings can be worth the trouble.

By the way, the facts of were the second thing I was taught in crypto training. Here was the first - and a hard lesson, forcefully emphasized.

Unvaried stimulus, regardless of amplitude, is equivalent to NO stimulus.

The most "obvious" things are hard to see. That's a good reason to point them out.

I'm not sure I'm posting again tonight. When I cited the data in - and the basic lesson about complexity and fallibility in Nemo's story - I was hoping to refer to points that Jorian could reasonably learn.

Jorian has a low opinion of platitudes - but when there are basic facts and relations that should be platitudes - because they are of very wide application - yet those fact and relations are not widely known - it can be useful to work those things out.

How many people know how high the frequency of "the most common things" is - not just in language - but in most things people do?

More should. Maybe from the first grade on.

bluestar23 - 07:57pm Nov 4, 2003 EST (# 16537 of 16548)

Well, you're still babbling Showalter, but NO ONE is listening.....the Forum is're all ALONE again....

More Messages Recent Messages (11 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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