MIT Professor John Leonard at Michael McCann's framegate class on PSI

[rexxar]

MIT is trash compared to the UOG (University of Goodell.)

 

[Gumby]

You guys are all missing the IMO most likely reason why the nyjfl wanted so many interviews with the Doritos dinks......

It's called process crime (or the scooter Libby syndrome): Well's was clearly looking for a fall guy, somebody he could hang SOMETHING on. Well, if he could get the bozos to commit to some fact-assertion in interview 1 or 2, and then get them to contradict themselves later in interview 4 or 5 when their memories get fuzzy..... BINGO, you get lying to the investigator (even if they didn't actually do anything wrong up front). Thats essentialy what they endend up going After brady on (cell phone etc).

 

[Oswlek]

You guys are all missing the IMO most likely reason why the nyjfl wanted so many interviews with the Doritos dinks......

It's called process crime (or the scooter Libby syndrome): Well's was clearly looking for a fall guy, somebody he could hang SOMETHING on. Well, if he could get the bozos to commit to some fact-assertion in interview 1 or 2, and then get them to contradict themselves later in interview 4 or 5 when their memories get fuzzy..... BINGO, you get lying to the investigator (even if they didn't actually do anything wrong up front). Thats essentialy what they endend up going After brady on (cell phone etc).

That seems to be what everyone is saying. The only difference is that some are providing procedural grounds that support NE's refusal.

 

[Rhodey]

We live in a county where certain issues remain politically divisive, hard-fought topics despite there being near scientific consensus on one side of the issue. So no matter how flawless this someone's reputation is, and no matter how fact-drive and undeniable their expose is, I feel pretty comfortable asserting that people who don't like the conclusion will generally dispute it anyway. Because their ignorance is just as valid as your well-researched, thoroughly documented truth somehow. As long as they can find the occasional bad actor that's explicitly been paid to reach the conclusion they want to hear (Exponent), that will trump scientific consensus.

Consensus is not science.

In fact, I would go on to say that science without spirit (not to be confused with religion) is incomplete and incorrect. But I digress.

In regards to what you stated and truth..."the desire for actual truth exists in very few minds, and the capacity to discern it in fewer still. When men say that they are seeking the truth, they mean that they are looking for evidence to support some prejudice or prepossession. Their beliefs are moulded to their wishes. They see all, and more than all, that seems to tell for that which they desire; they are blind as bats to whatever tells against them" (HP Blavatsky).

 

[Galeb]

Consensus is not science.

In fact, I would go on to say that science without spirit (not to be confused with religion) is incomplete and incorrect. But I digress.

In regards to what you stated and truth..."the desire for actual truth exists in very few minds, and the capacity to discern it in fewer still. When men say that they are seeking the truth, they mean that they are looking for evidence to support some prejudice or prepossession. Their beliefs are moulded to their wishes. They see all, and more than all, that seems to tell for that which they desire; they are blind as bats to whatever tells against them" (HP Blavatsky).

Quality post. Although this link may seem unrelated, all three of your major points are key components in this discussion.

 

[NashuaPats]

Boston.com has an article about this today. There were three science professors that spoke in McCann's class. All three stated the balls measured as expected.

Great quote by Leonard, "It’s pretty much an open and shut case, but somehow Goodell never understood it, and still doesn’t to this day.”

At ‘Deflategate’ class, scientists let the air out of the NFL

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

To the everlasting credit of this excellent site, detailed Ideal Gas Law calculations were posted right here months ago time and again by several regulars and a couple occasional posters. These folks had science and engineering backgrounds. Unfortunately, most here missed these excellent analyses because a few of the perpetually offended whined and got all the deflate discussion moved off the main forum so few saw them.

 

[Rhodey]

Working with and past the "science" of it all, which supports the fact that those who have purported this insanity are hoping that the rest are stupid, the New England Patriots, their fans and football fans everywhere should be saying: NO!

And by this, I am implying that not only should the Patriots have their pick and money restored, but that Roger Goodell & the NFL should be punished!

In addition, Tom Brady should have all out-of-pocket expenses compensated ASAP.

And the New England Patriots should also be compensated for this collective bit of insanity put forth in the form of a massive smear campaign.

 

[Oswlek]

In fact, I would go on to say that science without spirit (not to be confused with religion) is incomplete and incorrect

What do you mean by this?

 

[Rhodey]

What do you mean by this?

I'd be more than glad to go into heaps of details, perhaps, in another thread.

 

[Oswlek]

I'd be more than glad to go into heaps of details, perhaps, in another thread.

Go right ahead and reply with a link.

 

[Galeb]

Go right ahead and reply with a link.

 

[Rhodey]

Go right ahead and reply with a link.

Instead, what I am going to do is answer your original question as concisely as possible. FYI: I run a few groups on topic on other channels/sites which contain heaps of details, however, I choose not to be supplying my personal infos et al. (And that's what would happen if I supply links to those groups.)

According to Einstein: "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." However, one would have to be blind to see that religion without SPIRIT is impotent or lame. Ergo, this offering is incomplete and incorrect. What he should have said is: Science without SPIRIT is lame, SPIRIT without science is blind. And that is what I meant by that by the statement that you inquired about.

Of course, that is my opinion. If one disagrees- that's fine. One can be perfectly happy without having to have others agree, yeah?

 

[Oswlek]

Instead, what I am going to do is answer your original question as concisely as possible. FYI: I run a few groups on topic on other channels/sites which contain heaps of details, however, I choose not to be supplying my personal infos et al. (And that's what would happen if I supply links to those groups.)

According to Einstein: "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." However, one would have to be blind to see that religion without SPIRIT is impotent or lame. Ergo, this offering is incomplete and incorrect. What he should have said is: Science without SPIRIT is lame, SPIRIT without science is blind. And that is what I meant by that by the statement that you inquired about.

Of course, that is my opinion. If one disagrees- that's fine. One can be perfectly happy without having to have others agree, yeah?

That's what I thought. For the record, I disagree.

 

[memento]

Here's another slideshow from McCann's class, from Martin Wosnik

 

[Rhodey]

That's what I thought. For the record, I disagree.

As I sensed that you did...why I saved myself the work and a big, drawn-out discussion.

How 'bout those Patriots!

 

[memento]

The Wosnik slideshow is a homework assignment he put out in the early days of deflategate, 2psi and all. For anyone doing the hard numbers it's important to remember p1 and p2 should be in absolute pressure (gauge pressure + atmospheric pressure)

It is surprising how many people who weighed in initially used
gauge pressure instead of absolute pressure to calculate the
effect of temperature decrease on pressure. Since this gives a
smaller Δp, it further “inflated” Deflategate.

I lost a lot of respect for Neil Degrasse Tyson when he came out with calculations forgetting the absolute pressure.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

We live in a county where certain issues remain politically divisive, hard-fought topics despite there being near scientific consensus on one side of the issue. So no matter how flawless this someone's reputation is, and no matter how fact-drive and undeniable their expose is, I feel pretty comfortable asserting that people who don't like the conclusion will generally dispute it anyway. Because their ignorance is just as valid as your well-researched, thoroughly documented truth somehow. As long as they can find the occasional bad actor that's explicitly been paid to reach the conclusion they want to hear (Exponent), that will trump scientific consensus.

This is spot on.
I realize you are speaking directly to the point of science as it relates to testing, observation, measurement and research. But the point goes to a larger one of knowledge and truth in all its applications.

To the GP(general public) knowledge and truth is just another commodity that is 'fact' simply by how well it is sold. If it can be draped in authority-ness, proper science-y sounding, repetition/propagation, how well it can penetrate the GP's weak spots: confirmation bias, laziness, ignorance (or a combination of all three). The ideologues, politicians, product/power pushers, general axe grinders with the right juice/connections can send that neatly adorned packaging down to their bought & paid for connections in order to monopolize the medium for which the GP is fed(sold) information.

Credit Goodell and his gang for using this process very well. As we all saw first hand, the GP ate up the sh!+ sandwich like it was filet mignon.
While the GP's weaknesses are obviously part of the problem, there isn't a whole lot that can be done about it. IMHO the real problem here is the bought&paid for monolithic voice of the medium. By its very nature a monolithic voice is anti science. And without dissent or when dissent has no voice, truth-fact-science-call it what you will is certain to be made into what the monolithic voice says it MUST be regardless of the science/truth. Bottom line: the biggest reason the crap sandwich known as deflategate erroneously became accepted and entrenched fact is because dissent had no opportunity to speak. The glittery packaging of deflategate had virtually no one saying the packaging contained nothing inside. The monolithic voice was too deafening for that to be said. And as long as the only voice to speak is singular in its message, not only will science suffer the glib GP will get F'd over while thinking the Fing over is cake and ice cream.
Anytime I hear the medium say 'polling revealed...' or 'researchers at University of X found....' or 'Government department X says 1 in......' I cringe at the good prospects that I'm about to be forced to take a big bite out of a giant sh!+ sandwich....

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

 

[363839]

Instead, what I am going to do is answer your original question as concisely as possible. FYI: I run a few groups on topic on other channels/sites which contain heaps of details, however, I choose not to be supplying my personal infos et al. (And that's what would happen if I supply links to those groups.)

According to Einstein: "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." However, one would have to be blind to see that religion without SPIRIT is impotent or lame. Ergo, this offering is incomplete and incorrect. What he should have said is: Science without SPIRIT is lame, SPIRIT without science is blind. And that is what I meant by that by the statement that you inquired about.

Of course, that is my opinion. If one disagrees- that's fine. One can be perfectly happy without having to have others agree, yeah?

I just can't imagine Einstein using the word lame.
idk maybe he read it on an internet meme.