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.

cantabb - 10:03am Oct 8, 2003 EST (# 14626 of 14638)

rshow55 - 09:33am Oct 8, 2003 EST (# 14625 of 14625)

Cantabb - call me on the phone - tell me how I can identify you

Why should I do that ? Why do you need to "identify" me or anyone (You can always do your guess work on it, can't you) ? Are my posts NOT sufficiently clear to you ? What's this obsessive NEED to identify posters ? [Fredmoore, pay attention to the usage & examples].

On Forums, you respond to what's posted. It's NOT a chat-room where such details may be asked or exchanged.

Why do I need to know who YOU are ? Even IF WERE EVER interested in that or to know anything about you as a poster/person, aren't the massive autobiographical details you posted here and in your other links sufficient to have an idea ???

- and after I'm sure who you are we can talk in interactive ways that are more effective than this thread offers in some key ways.

You don't NEED that. JUST respond to the posts [you like to] and questions posted for you here -- that's what the Forums are for ?

Is that why whosoever you think "placed" you here [Eisenhower, Casey, CIA, or NYT brass or forum moderators] ? To find out the identity of other posters, before you can respond to their posts or have a meaningful unambiguous and focused exchange with them ?

This 'obsession' fits in with other such obsessions you seem to have.

You might be surprised how much would get clear. You might even be surprised at how fast it would happen.

Ask WRCooper and/or Lou Mazza again. Or Fredmoore ? They might be interested in a phone call.

I'll be surprised if you CAN focus and post meaningful on-topic stuff and discuss it rationally -- instead of your endless re-hash of irrelevant things and abuse of this forum for some personal purposes.

I'll be surprised IF you CAN answer the questions you have been dodging for the past 3 weeks.

rshow55 - 10:04am Oct 8, 2003 EST (# 14627 of 14638)
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.

Cantabb: "NOTHING you show here says you can automatically find all the "dots"/"relevant facts," and "connect" them rationally too."

Note the "all" above .

You can't get them all - but you don't need to get them all - all you need is reasonable subsets of them - because so much connects with so much else.

14260 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.n9g5batmLiW.1165940@.f28e622/15970

In precision grinding - for instance for lenses -or precision metallic machinery or components - there's a great deal of " going round and round" smoothing out objects with respect to themselves - and there is also some periodic checking to external standards.

Both statistical processes and matching are involved.

Internal consistency and consistency with a finite set of surface elements and intermediate abrasive grains is all that is ever involved in grinding.

That's enough for it to work as well as it does.

Things converge.

You don't need to know everything .

But using different things - that - ought to be related - you can do a lot of crosschecking.

If we reject mistakes - and keep sorting and resorting - for our purposes - a lot can and does converge if finding right answers is one of our key purposes.

rshow55 - 10:08am Oct 8, 2003 EST (# 14628 of 14638)
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.

Cantabb - http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.n9g5batmLiW.1165940@.f28e622/16337

I'm dealing with you on a batched basis - because noise immunity is necessary to function - and so much of your stuff looks so much like noise to me.

I do consider your points from time to time. But I don't see why I should feel forced to organize my mind to fit the connections you want - unless it feels right -and at my pace.

I don't expect any more than that from anybody else.

cantabb - 10:09am Oct 8, 2003 EST (# 14629 of 14638)

jorian319 - 10:03am Oct 8, 2003 EST (# 14626 of 14627)

Whothehell would do a stupid thing like that? [That is, "tell (rshow55) how (he) can identify you"]. [emphasis added]

Er, erm, [sheesh] a few of the posters have done things 'like that', and have lived to tell the forum about it.

:)

(9 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense