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.

lchic - 12:38am Aug 17, 2002 EST (# 3751 of 3766)

"" lchic inferred nuclear annhilation, which never occurred

There is a risk of accident.

The Russian Sub had an 'accident'.

Accidents happen.

Conversely there is no such thing as an accident - it's poor quality control.

Quality control has a
statistical dimension/Demingion

Risk has to be factored into quality control.

Having Nukes sitting waiting to blow will have quality aspects related to

quality failure - mechanical + rust + age
quality failure - human - incompetence + mistakes
quality failure - human-terrorism - intentional
These factors apply to both Home and Away
doubling the potential of the world blowing!

lchic - 12:43am Aug 17, 2002 EST (# 3752 of 3766)

The comments re Bob above are unwarranted. Bob's phone is bugged ... and info has spilled over onto this board unrelated to thread discussion.

That 'you guys' sit listening in is a give-away :)

lchic - 01:35am Aug 17, 2002 EST (# 3753 of 3766)

Brooker, Krysten.
They Saw the Future: Oracles, Psychics, Scientists, Great Thinkers, and Pretty Good Guessers. Atheneum, 1999.
A collection of chapter biographies about twelve personalities who had a knack for predicting what lay in the future.
available in texas

http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ld/projects/trc/bibs/2000/books.html

Do people shape the future?

Are there great intellectuals on whose shoulders the 'NOW' stands?

Is it necessary to understand the 'past' and the 'now' to see a path into an improved 'future'?

lchic - 01:44am Aug 17, 2002 EST (# 3754 of 3766)

Showalter has throughout the pace of this thread reflected 'past', recounted present, and put forward implementable potentials to work towards an improved future.

The improved future regarding MD is to END the COLD WAR.

The improved future for those embarking on that difficult and unnatural task of reading is to drill high frequency words - first - have them in place as automatics and this in turn will make the challenge of learning to read less difficult.

Taking the hard statistic that 90% of Americans in jail have literacy problems - then, it can be seen immediately that 'the State' has failed them.

Would they have had better lives and futures had they enjoyed literacy?

The answer is undoubtedly 'YES'!

lchic - 02:07am Aug 17, 2002 EST (# 3755 of 3766)

Culture has it's weak spots

as did Chain and Armour http://www.longshank.co.uk/armour.htm

Showalter, here's someone talking on a topic seen much on the MD and GU threads you commend:

"a global consciousness of inclusion" ... http://www.ndol.org/blueprint/2002_jul_aug/18_ideas.html by former Oxford guy

Note the source of this is a Journal/Magazine called Blueprint it deals with 'IDEAS' http://www.ndol.org/blueprint/

lchic - 02:12am Aug 17, 2002 EST (# 3756 of 3766)

The weak spots in culture have to be isolated, identified so that solutions can be found.

Showalter's training has been to look to problem areas, to work at them until he can identify the problem, and then suggest a means whereby it can be solved.

The net result being that the problem or hurdle no longer blocks progress enabling the culture, the project, the thinking to accept it, absorb it, use it as a tool or lever, and move on.

There's always another problem to be 'gotten over' .. as an American might say.

(10 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense