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?

rshow55 - 09:04pm Jan 16, 2002 EST (#10825 of 10834)

rshow55 1/16/02 7:31am

I want the United States to be as strong as it can possibly be, with respect to the real world, as it is, and must be. . . . . I'd be for anything that actually strengthened the United States -- in ways Americans themselves, reasonably informed, would accept. . . . . That's always been true, and it is still true. Maybe I'm wrong about one thing or another (isn't everybody?) Maybe I've misjudged something or other (I'm sure I have.)

Even so, I don't believe that any of the MD programs roughly described in public so far (with the exception of the Garwin proposal, as I've said) have a decent chance of working.

If that's right, it the programs aren't in the national interest. And finding out whether that is right or not can be done -- to the level of listing "miracles" that need to be surmounted (and I think there are many) in the open literature. With umpires.

Why not?

rshow55 - 09:07pm Jan 16, 2002 EST (#10826 of 10834)

I'll repeat rshow55 1/16/02 8:42pm

Out.

gisterme - 09:12pm Jan 16, 2002 EST (#10827 of 10834)

guy_catelli 1/16/02 8:37pm

BINGO!

guy_catelli - 09:28pm Jan 16, 2002 EST (#10828 of 10834)
the trick of Mensa

the whole technology dodge is a red herring.

the operative paradigm here is not Newtonian; it's Freudian.

substituting psychobabble for technobabble: Robert hates himself (perhaps not entirely without reason). projecting this self-hatred onto america provides temporary symtomatic relief from his dwelling on his own self-hatred. by hating america, Robert's conscious mind can convince itself that he is morally superior to the self-image his unconscious mind holds.

the stated technical objections are pure self-deception. the critics of MD have characterized the technical difficulty as "hitting a bullet with a bullet". if so, this is a very simple problem compared to many others that rshow55 would never dream of opposing work on.

for just two examples: cancer and AIDS. the variables involved in the MD problem are few and they are very well understood, ie, gravity, mass, velocity, friction, etc.

by contrast, we barely know what cancer *is*; and we only have the dimmest understanding of the forces that bring it about, much less those that might prevent it from coming about.

this, in spite of the fact that vast sums and the better part of a century have been expended on the problem. yet, none of the critics of MD would dream of using this as an argument against continued cancer research. only a fool or a knave would. (and, the critics of MD are always trumpeting how much wiser they are than the rest of us.)

the better the drug defenses against HIV, the more HIV mutates into forms that continue penetrating the immune system. and, this is the case generally with anitbiotics and infectious agents. admittedly, this is the cause of no small amount of alarm in the medical profession. but, it would be ludicrous to suggest that no more antiretrivirals or antibiotics be developed. (needless to say, there are fools/knaves who propose just that.)

but, on the whole, none of the opponents of MD are among those who oppose development of ARVs or antibiotics. this proves how dishonest their (supposed) technical objections to MD are.

lchic - 10:20pm Jan 16, 2002 EST (#10829 of 10834)

Recommended storage time at Zero Degrees:

Tripe ................................4 months

guy_catelli - 10:38pm Jan 16, 2002 EST (#10830 of 10834)
the trick of Mensa

"Tripe"

see: http://www.worlddigitalart.com/guests/Art2/pages/baby%20tripe.htm

lchic - 10:48pm Jan 16, 2002 EST (#10831 of 10834)

You certainly are a handsome Guy, Mr Catelli - Sir!
By George you are my good fellow!

lchic - 10:50pm Jan 16, 2002 EST (#10832 of 10834)

With the sophistication of state of the art Enterprise Systems (data base) the question arises as to how an American Energy Company can be in such Top Down disarray that it doesn't appreciate it's own illiquidity!

The gut feeling of the populus is that there are shortfalls and holes in the US budget and 'system' relating to:

• Failure to fulfil promises re WTC cleanup
• Failure to meet basic ER medical demands
• Failure of tax rebate (to rich) hand back
• Failure of Presidential System - If costs re elections put the best people out of the race - it's a failure. - If costs are so high that 'shareholders' (Enron + other Companies) have to 'unknowingly' subsidise the rich runners.
• Failure to administrate a fair national voting system!
• Failure to keep the imaginary 'Locked Box' Locked!
• Failure to ensure future provision for a huge sector of US population
• Failure to close the Cold War
• Failure to bring down Nukes
• Failure to remove this financial burden from an overburdened economy.
• Failure to invoke the Geneva Convention re War Prisoner Rights

Time for examination and review!

guy_catelli - 11:06pm Jan 16, 2002 EST (#10833 of 10834)
the trick of Mensa

"You certainly are a handsome Guy, Mr Catelli - Sir!"

merci, cher Mademoiselle le Chic.

(1 following message)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense