Bad Morty
-
Posts
981 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Bad Morty
-
-
You realize in great QB debates Brady will be the only candidate who's case will be responded with "yea but", right?
you realize that you are out of your mind if you believe this, right? Lol.
-
So much for the notion that this will impact legacies in any way at all...
-
Last sentence- Goodell arguably has nothing to gain and everything to lose by voluntary allowing Brady to play in every game in the 2015 season. IMO Goodell does not want to sound weak and the four games stand is what I got out of this article.
He has potentially a lot to lose if Brady takes it all the way to court.
-
-
Wrong again. They were "out of the picture" because they chose not to field the NFL's questions, not because they came to different conclusions than the NFL. But you keep spinning and deflecting without any proof.
And I wonder why they "chose not to field the questions"? Could it possibly be because an Ivy League university wasn't willing to compromise it's integrity by selling a rigged science report the way Exponent did?
-
From the article....
Still, William Zajc, a scientist from Columbia’s physics department who confirmed the NFL’s overture to the Times, is skeptical.
“I think it’s more likely than not that [the footballs] were manipulated,” he said.
Interesting indeed.
He stated that OPINION prior to actually doing any tests...then all of a sudden they are out of the picture in favor of the "sure Tobacco Industry - we'll get you a report that says second hand smoke doesn't cause cancer!" folks.
-
He dismisses any test that shows any negativity on any Patriot.
This is patently false. I dismiss only one test that shows negativity, because to my knowledge there has been only one set of tests that shows any negativity and that's the test contained in the Wells report. There have been several scientists who have made the claim that the research and conclusions are suspect here. Has any scientist come out in support of the Wells findings? I haven't heard a single supporting claim. Here's another interesting side note on the Wells report - tell me what you make of this. Back in February, reports went out that the NFL had reached out to the Columbia University Physics Department to assist with the research. Professor William Zajc of Columbia confirmed the NFL's interest back then http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/deflate-gate-investigator-seeks-help-ivy-league-physicist . Fast forward to May when the Wells report was released...not one mention of Columbia University is to be found. I wonder why that is? Perhaps Columbia's physicists didn't arrive at the conclusions the NFL was seeking?
-
Hi there,
I just saw you locked the other thread before I had a chance to let you know that I realize from your post that you spent a lot of time trying to recreate the test case scenario. I think that was awesome that you did that and tried to come up with your own, real world conclusions. I am not sure if we will really get the answers to what really happened that night but there have been numerous reports that have cast a lot of doubt on Wells/Exponents findings mostly based on their test case scenario and faulty premise. I believe in the end that may be enough to help Brady and possibly avoid court but I guess we will see. Either way, wanted to make sure you knew that I appreciated all your work even if I said I prefer to trust the actual scientists on this issue. That certainly does not set aside your findings at all.
here here...I agree. You did a thorough job of it.
-
Here's the rub, bub. Formulas don't lie. Input lies. That's how I get the saying "Figures lie, and liars figure."
The necessary weather data from game day by hour is on the internet. The pressures measured are in the Wells report. Unless someone gives the true temp setting in the Pats locker room for the guess of 75 F is conservatively high, 3 F above standard room temperature. given a reduced and simplified formula of the Ideal Gas law, anybody can indeed plug and chug (do they even say that anymore? Dang I'm so old... but I digress) those numbers and get the correct result, and maybe not understand a thing they were doing in getting it. And others do understand, get the same results, and can chat about it. My input figures are as accurate as I can find, and the assumption (locker room temperature) is set conservatively. It's real and replicable.
So if you don't understand the methods and results and are just pretending and making stuff up, then why are you trying to debunk them? In finding errors in either my or Bubbz findings, your credibility goes to Zero unless you do some serious work and show the work and results. I put in the effort, and mine is out there. I think Bubbz did too, in a different way. It's open for debate and discussion, but be real about it.
I think you completely missed the point. I understand CLEARLY what was attempted in trying to prove deflation occurred. But I also understand that the people collecting the "Data" that was used as the basis for the proof were not scientists, nor were they sensitive to collecting the data in a truly "scientific" manner such that a real analysis could be done without the numerous assumptions that had to be made. The fact that something as basic to the analysis as "which of the 2 gauges was used" was missed and had to be deduced speaks volumes for the quality of the process. So whatever you or anybody else does with the numbers, it still by definition involves making assumptions about variables, assumptions that could easily sway the conclusion one way or another. I don't know this for a fact, however my guess is that nobody involved in conducting this operation thought that there would be any more analysis needed beyond "here are the measurements, and they are lower than the starting PSI. Case closed". You'll never convince me that anyone even considered that the conditions would deflate the balls, and the poor data collection process all but proves that.
-
“I believe the data available on ball pressures can be explained on the basis of physical law, without manipulation. The scientific analysis in the Wells Report was a good attempt to seek the truth, however, it was based on data that are simply insufficient. In experimental science to reach a meaningful conclusion we make measurements multiple times under well-defined physical conditions. This is how we deal with the error or ‘spread’ of measured values. In the pressure measurements physical conditions were not very well-defined and major uncertainties, such as which gauge was used in pre-game measurements, affect conclusions. Finally, the claim of a statistically significant difference in pressure drop between the two team balls regardless of which gauge was used did not account for the fact that the Colts balls were apparently measured at the end of halftime since the officials ran out of time and made only four measurements – in other words, the Colts balls were measured after the Patriots balls and had warmed up more. For the above reasons, the Wells Report conclusion that physical law cannot explain the pressures is incorrect.” - Roderick MacKinnon, 2003 Nobel Prize Winner in Chemistry.
-
Well if they're wrong feel free to point out where I messed up. I guess you could ignore the researchers who agree with me as well
lol. I could throw some numbers back at you and pretend I know what I'm talking about, but that would just amount to two internet people making stuff up and trying to pass themselves off as knowledgeable when neither one of us is. Exponent spent months replicating conditions and running experiments before concluding that the PSI levels should have been 11.3. It's utterly laughable for you or any other hack with a keyboard to dust off your junior high school chemistry books to tell us your back of the envelope "calculation" is more accurate.
-
Still waiting on that link.......
somebody already provided a link to the Jason Cole video where he explains it. Read the thread.
-
There is no proof that balls weren't deflated.
read the above sentence again...see if you can stop yourself from laughing out loud. I couldn't.
-
Yeah, the most those balls could have dropped was .45 psi. I did the simple math right there for you. You clearly can't argue against it, or just don't have the capacity to understand it to begin with. I don't care what any report says, I used facts and did the calculations for myself and the fact of the matter is the balls did not naturally deflate due to natural conditions.
You make a lot of stuff up or grossly misrepresent and skew things so there is no point in arguing with you anymore. You look quite pathetic honestly. You just went from saying no deflation occurred at all to this. Actually re reading your post I am not sure what direction you are going In at all as it's all over the place and half of it is gibberish and fiction that I can hardly understand
You have made me change my opinion. Clearly, a 2 paragraph set of calculations by "some guy from the internet" carries far more weight than the opinion of a research organization whose business is to study and analyze this type of thing.
-
Between 2 and 7 Patriots balls were deflated beyond the Ideal Gas Law prediction, depending upon gauge used. No Colts balls were. Period.
PV = nRT science is here- http://forums.colts.com/topic/38957-the-cbf-report-deflate-science-re-done-independently/#entry1125750
if there was an actual scheme to deflate balls to gain a competitive advantage, every single ball would have been significantly and unequivocally below where they should have been regardless of which gauge was used. If the best you can tell me is that 6 balls were 0.2 PSI below the ideal gas law on one of the gauges, you really don't have evidence of a plot to cheat.
-
You know what I was tired of hearing this nonsense so I did the calculations myself. Now it has been a while since I've taken a chem class so anyone feel free to correct me on my calculations if you have a clue as to what I'm talkin about.
Gaylussacs gas law states that pressure is directly proportional to temperature. It can be expressed as p1/t1=p2/t2. The patriots claim that tom lines his balls right at 12.5 psi, which is the lowest you can legally have them before the gAme so I used that as my initial pressure (giving them the Botd they weren't at 12.6 or something)
So let's plug it in, you have to convert 12.5 psi into ATM (atmospheric pressure) for the equation to work. One ATM equals 14.7 psi therefore 12.5 psi equals .8503 ATMs.
Now you have to convert the temperatures from farenheight to kelvin. I didn't feel like doing the long conversions so I used google to convert 70 farenheight (room temperature) to Celsius then u get kelvin by adding 273 degrees. So room temperature was roughly 294 kelvin, outside kickoff (50 degrees farenheight) comes out to 283.5 kelvin.
Now the fun part, plugging it in. You have if you have been able to keep up through that, .8503/294=x/283.5 . X representing the new pressure that should have resulted from the temperature change. You have to convert this resulting number back to psi from ATMs by multiplying it by 14.7.
Ladies and gentlemen the jury is in, the pats ball should have came in at a whopping 12.05 psi. Their lowest ball weighed in at around 10.5 psi. There was no change in temperature that could account for that.
Do your own research, you're wrong
I was going by the Wells report science, which said the balls should have measured at 11.3 if they started at 12.5. So you can reach out to Exponent and give them your ideas, but they concluded that 11.3 was the number. The measurements taken by the logo gauge (which the ref said he used but Wells said "no sorry - we think you have excellent memory of everything...except this...you used the other gauge), were all above 11.3. The measurements by the other gauge...3 were above 11.3, 6 were within 0.2 PSI, and 2 were a bit lower, but still within 0.5 PSI. The whole point of the Wells report science is to try to "explain away" the fact that the measurements don't prove that there was intentional tampering...that's why the measurements of the 4 Colts balls were brought in. Wells is basically saying "OK - if you just look at the measurements of the Pats balls, it doesn't jump out at you that any tampering occurred...but look at the difference between how much the Colts balls deflated versus the Pats balls...the Pats balls dropped WAY more! So that's how they conclude that the tampering happened...except for the small detail that their calculations of the relative pressure drops between the 2 teams was done incorrectly, incompletely, and has been pretty universally debunked. So in conclusion, the actual halftime measurements don't indicate any tampering occurred, and the 'back door' comparison to the Colts balls doesn't work...so the ONLY thing this case is built on is text messages and the fact that the guy took the balls into the bathroom.
-
Thanks . I finally get it. It's similar to if I go into a bank , point a gun at a teller's head and demand a bag of cash. The teller gives me a bag of deposit slips. I take it run out the door without realizing I had nothing. They catch me but can't prosecute me because I didn't get any money. So do I have it right ? It doesn't matter how much circumstantial evidence there is pointing to what most of us feel happened. If the ball measurements can be explained by weather conditions , nothing happened ?
so is your theory then that the intention was to deflate the balls, but he failed? I wonder what happened...maybe he tried putting the wrong end of the pin into the footballs?
-
I really don't see any other interpretation. If you're so smart, feel free to provide a plausible explanation, don't just dig yourself a bigger whole and come off as a buffoon
the plausible explanation is that they measured the footballs at halftime and there's no conclusive science to show that the balls were any more deflated than they should have been given the conditions. So if the balls weren't significantly lower than you'd expect, then the text messages mean nada.
-
I was dead wrong until the evidence came out. Not so bad after everything was released. You guys have just ignored the evidence and say they have proved nothing because the evidence is circumstantial. Then make false claims that the science "PROVES" nothing happened. All the time ignoring common sense issues that any normal individual would conclude points to Brady being involved. Not quite the same thing....
Even the NFL now concedes that they couldn't prove deflation via the ball measurements
-
What other inference can be made from:
"Screw tom in going to make that next ball a balloon"
"He actually mentioned u last night, he said u must be under a lot of stress trying to get them all done"
"I told him it was"
"I checked some of the balls this morning, the refs screwed us, a few of them were almost at 16"
"They didn't recheck them after they put air in them"
It can ONLY mean that they were deliberately deflating balls to gain an advantage, even though they measured the balls and they weren't deflated!!!
-
Actually there was a scandal. Thus the fine, loss of draft picks and a 4 game suspension
lol...sure there was.
-
You know I disagree with pretty much everything you posted. If you need a reminder, read the archives.
so again - you laugh off the notion that the NFL has an agenda, but won't answer a simple question regarding their behavior in the immediate aftermath of this that very strongly suggests that they did. The fact is, the NFL was more than happy to let the notion that there was a major cheating scandal float out there even though there was no such scandal.
-
You poor persecuted Pats fans. My heart hurts for you.
got it...so no answer then?
-
Right, because the NFL has an insistent and insatiable need to make the Patriots look bad.
you keep saying that sarcastically...there's a lot of evidence that strongly suggests this is in fact the case. Why do you think the NFL let the story of the 2lb deflation go uncorrected for so long? Please don't insult our intelligence by saying they didn't notice the story was out there. They react instantaneously to false news reports when they want to (see the Shefter tweet about Brady only being allowed 4 hours to make his case. Aiello had a correction out there within minutes).
Deflategate merge -- pending appeal results
in NFL General
Posted
generally when one starts a sentence with "could it be", what follows from there is clearly an opinion/speculation.