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 - 01:42pm Sep 10, 2002 EST (# 4255 of 4261)

Iraq - Indonesia

http://www.abc.net.au/am/s671740.htm

Times writer looks at Iraq attack 09-09-2002 There are not many journalists writing today who can say they have won three Pulitzer Prizes, but that distinction belongs to New York Times writer Tom Friedman.

As foreign affairs columnist for the Times, Friedman has always had the broadest of briefs - to interpret the world for American readers.

But since the events of September 11 last year, he now has the freedom to explore what he has called "the biggest single news story in my life". [Hear the audio]

http://abc.net.au/lateline/

see also lateline 10th Sept Kissenger

Kissenger sees current terrorism as akin to the upheaval of The 30 Years War (1618-1648) Reformation era.

lchic - 01:54pm Sep 10, 2002 EST (# 4256 of 4261)

Citizens of the USA 'funded' the terrorism of Norhtern Ireland .... that took young boys .... undereducated boys ... turned them into murderers and set them lose on their neighbours.

The 'boys' now men - many having spent time in prison - grown and matured - reflect back .... so what was the Northern Ireland issue about?

The problems of NI that may have related to sectarianism and economic poverty were in many ways wiped out with improved legislation. Yet the Terror went on .... fed and funded by 'misguided' Americans --- what did they think they were doing?

http://www.nd.edu/~observer/02252000/Viewpoint/0.html

lchic - 02:25pm Sep 10, 2002 EST (# 4257 of 4261)

Tears - the science of

"" At the beginning, I mentioned an article by Steven Weinberg. He asks what do scientists do when they explain things? Part of the answer we now see, is that they concentrate on phenomena that are repeated. They look for uniformity. But much of what people do is disorderly.

So we have several kinds of knowledge.
1. One is represented by science, which is founded on the search for regularities, sometimes for laws of nature, backed by maths and logic.
2. Another is the kind expressed by poets who usually tell us about single people or experiences, such as Ruth and her tears.
3. A third is our intuitive, everyday understanding of our neighbours, whether they’re weeping or not. Our useful knowledge of ourselves is mostly non-scientific.

Or at least, perhaps you’ll agree that this notion is arguable. I know our age is sometimes called scientific, so you may find what I’ve just said merely ridiculous, in fact laughable.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ockham/stories/s650802.htm

lchic - 02:43pm Sep 10, 2002 EST (# 4258 of 4261)

English - learning - spelling
""You don’t have to be a professional linguist to fix the functional faults of current methods of teaching literacy skills ... Children have to learn how to learn, before they can learn content ... Dr Yule reported in 1973 how fast and accurately children recognise words if spelling difficulties don’t block their comprehension. Remember ‘speed-reading’? It claimed wondrous results like 1500 words per minute. It works for newspaper articles, if you already know enough about the topic to pick out the new snippets while zipping breathlessly along. In first year BSc, I had to slow down to 150 words per minute for learning physical chemistry.

Speed-reading testing measures how fast readers can correctly recognise single words flashed on a screen. This became vitally important during World War II in designing all kinds of instrument and control panels. In fighter aeroplanes, finding the right dial, reading it correctly, and hitting the right response button instantly means life or death.
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ockham/stories/s668070.htm
see also
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ockham/stories/s547135.htm

lchic - 03:32pm Sep 10, 2002 EST (# 4259 of 4261)

"" Washington Post - says no hard evidence to link Iraq with 'terrorism' ... need a public debate that distinguishes between HARD FACTS and the rest

Bush and Cheney set the goal - of evidence - no clear evidence - they've changed the goal!

(DW German Radio / Newslink / Essen Foundation for peace and conflict research )

~~~

9/11 Germany http://dw-world.de/english/0,3367,1430_A_623034_1_A,00.html

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense