New York Times Readers Opinions
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 (13045 previous messages)

fredmoore - 06:07pm Jul 17, 2003 EST (# 13046 of 13047)

Jorian:

'Write to Fredmoore for a list of things he and I have done to keep this thread's damage to a minimum.'

No need for a list ....

the point's not missed

we need a bigger plan

and it goes like this:

First, answer the question: "Who are we and What do we want?"

And the answer friends is EMERGY .. and ... that starts with 'E' and that rhymes with 'KEY' and that starts with 'K' and that stands for .... 'KAEP'.

Yes sir that's A Kyoto Alternative Energy Protocol. A gently staged program for ALL nations to explore what it is that humankind really wants and then deliver it without interference in national sovereignty.

EMERGY is defined in:

http://www.esb.utexas.edu/drnrm/dieofforg/page17.htm

and KAEP is:

An effective Kyoto Alternative Energy treaty would link all countries

1. In a 10 year plan

2. With countries providing funds on a percentage of GDP basis ... up to .5% by mutual agreement.

3. For an international research and implementation program for: A. Converting one major power station in every city over 5 million people to dry rock geothermal. B. Developing and implementing Thermoelectric fabrics (eg polythiophene) for urban and agricultural power generation. C. Developing space based solar collectors and microwave transmission of power from space D. Terminating every stormwater and major farm runoff in an engineered wetland in order to conserve land based EMERGY in riverine catchments - from where it originates. This avoids the localised and catastrophic build up of energy at coastal boundaries around the planet, which is what we perceive as Climate Change.

Robert ...

As for floating PV arrays, I am in awe at the unforgiving power of the Oceans as portrayed in the film "The Perfect Storm". It is small wonder that life evolved out of the Oceans and we must ask ourselves:

"Is such a large scale human tenement of the Oceans a retrogradation?"

PS How do you get such long posts without a cut off. No one else can do (get away with) that? Hmmmmm!

More Messages Recent Messages (1 following message)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

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