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 - 09:26am Oct 3, 2003 EST (# 14254 of 14256)
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.

'Slime and Defend' By PAUL KRUGMAN http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/03/opinion/03KRUG.html

And now that the C.I.A. has demanded a Justice Department inquiry, the White House's strategy isn't just to stonewall, Nixon-style; as one Republican Congressional aide told The New York Times, it will "slime and defend."

To sort things out well - you need both synthesis from associations - "connecting the dots" - and "going around and around, different ways - to establish internal and external consistency - loop tests. I'm citing an article from Blaine Harden that has influenced me - that I associate and link with other ideas - some my own - some external. Doing "loop tests" - moving within the corpus gets some related ideas clarified and balanced enough that they can be tested.

In Virginia, Young Conservatives Learn How to Develop and Use Their Political Voices by Blaine Harden http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/11/politics/11CONS.html is cited here

http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md4000s/md4748.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md4000s/md4770.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5043.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5085.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5087.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5092.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5145.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5261.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5392.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5538.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5848-53.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5849.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md5000s/md5924.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md7000s/md7051.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md8000s/md8338.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md8000s/md8659.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md8000s/md8678.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md8000s/md8680.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md9000s/md9933.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md10000s/md10049.htm http://www.mrshowalter.net/a_md11000s/md11622.htm

And I believe that the associations make sense, and tend to reinforce what Paul Krugman says in 'Slime and Defend' http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/03/opinion/03KRUG.html

So does this article.

Bush 2000 Adviser Offered To Use Clout to Help Enron By Joe Stephens Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, February 17, 2002; Page A01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A22380-2002Feb16&notFound=true

cantabb - 09:47am Oct 3, 2003 EST (# 14255 of 14256)

rshow55 - 09:26am Oct 3, 2003 EST (# 14254 of 14254)

Another 20+ links to your own posts: recycled confusion.

To sort things out well - you need both synthesis from associations - "connecting the dots" - and "going around and around, different ways - to establish internal and external consistency - loop tests. I'm citing an article from Blaine Harden that has influenced me - that I associate and link with other ideas - some my own - some external. Doing "loop tests" - moving within the corpus gets some related ideas clarified and balanced enough that they can be tested.

AGAIN, the "dots" have to be verifiable facts [NOT opinions-metamorphosed into facts, and into sort of 'meta-facts']. "Connecting," fact-based logical, with a rationale [NOT a personal or subjective preference/convenience]. "Loop Tests": to confirm factual basis of the rationale/the components/the picture, etc. [NOT an attempt at recycled rationalizations].

Your approach violates the basics of rational analysis.

rshow55 - 10:34am Oct 3, 2003 EST (# 14256 of 14256)
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.

My approach makes sense of " basic principles of rational analysis" that have been dangerously incomplete all these years.

People really do "connect the dots" and "go round and round" and very often it converges. That makes our humanity and our culture possible.

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense