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.

rshow55 - 11:40pm Jul 28, 2002 EST (#3332 of 3339)

Maybe they're thinking.

MD3183 rshowalt 7/20/02 8:25pm

And ESPECIALLY - with respect to issues of "paradigm conflict" and "connecting the dots" Our Fathers of Old http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?13@@.ee79f4e/241

People's heads get full of "explanations" -- and have since history began... Those explanations can be totally wrong. Often have been. Yet ornate and convincing to the people who held them. And, often enough, held them with grisly results.

We have to learn to check the checkable. Because some patterns are much better than others.

MD2638 rshow55 6/20/02 12:56pm

MD115 rshow55 3/2/02 6:33pm

There have been times in the past where the truth has been "somehow, too weak."

Here is a piece on one of the most wrenching of those times -- when there was failure to communicate the Holocaust (part of a larger failure to stop Hitler.)

TURNING AWAY FROM THE HOLOCAUST by Max Frankel .. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/14/specials/onefifty/20FRAN.html

On nukes, a similar failure could end the world. I've been afraid that the risks of that have been, and remain, great. We need to do better. Lest the world end. I think we can.

MD116 rshow55 3/2/02 6:34pm includes this:

"Here are some references, to the Riley-Showalter paradigm thread, Paradigm Shift .... whose getting there? . . . that I think describe, in a new and clearer way, how paradigm conflict works.

Before we worked this out, though I spent a lot of time writing and lobbying on NYT boards, I had no way to "come in" according to Casey's instructions. I didn't know enough.

After I was touched and guided by lchic's brilliance, patience, and grace, I finally felt that I did know enough. And so, in September 2000, I tried to "come in" -- and have been trying ever since.

out for tonight.

kalter.rauch - 06:02am Jul 29, 2002 EST (#3333 of 3339)
Earth vs <^> <^> <^>

rshow55 7/28/02 11:40pm

Speaking of lchic, how can you be "touched and guided by lchic's brilliance, patience, and grace..."??? All she's doing is inputing leftwing paranoia into Google and posting the most inflammatory links. She certainly isn't graceful...she has the insolence to refer to other posters as "monikers"...even after I gave her a leading part in a short story installment I'm featuring in the Space Exploration Forum. What kind of gratitude is THAT?!?!?

One more thing......does rshow55=rshowalt ???

kalter.rauch - 06:04am Jul 29, 2002 EST (#3334 of 3339)
Earth vs <^> <^> <^>

I suspect lchic=lunarchick......

Yes...YESSS!!! A search reveals very similar material from such an entity...THIS YEAR!!! Hmmmmmm......?!?!? Velly intellestink......

lchic - 07:17am Jul 29, 2002 EST (#3335 of 3339)

Recent incidences of plane accidents relate not to 'bad luck' ... rather ERROR and poor planning.

Showing a reason to keep apace with training within a quality management framework.

rshow55 - 09:34am Jul 29, 2002 EST (#3336 of 3339)

Sometime, after 8:08 pm yesterday, and before wrcooper 7/28/02 9:27pm , "wrcooper" removed 22 of his postings, dating from July 15th (just before my main computer was knocked down.) I have the postings.

These postings represent serious effort on "wrcooper"'s part, and are neither casual nor honest.

I think most reasonable people reading these postings (and the way they associate in logic and time with Mazza's) -- and looking at the great efforts in them to defame me, and to defend and even glorfy George Johnson - would conclude what I've concluded.

I conclude that there is a very high likelyhood - not far short of a certainty - that wrcooper, kalter.rauch, mazza, and dirac are pseudonyms for George Johnson.

I believe that, because of postings on this thread since September 2000, especially those just deleted, and also because of very extensive private correspondence supporting the same inference.

For a lot of reasons, that inference should be checked. It can be.

I have the postings, and am looking at them.

This is a serious matter, and I'm dealing with it carefully.

lchic - 11:40am Jul 29, 2002 EST (#3337 of 3339)

GJ Dreaming

mazza9 - 11:59am Jul 29, 2002 EST (#3338 of 3339)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Kalter:

The real question is whether RShowalter=RShow55=RShowalt!

Who is the multiple personality?

Maybe a mythology has been created by Robert and his sidechic= lchic.

LuigiMazza

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense