Category Archives: on public lynchings

The Truth Revealed, Definitively

I couldn’t resist this comment, which finally puts to rest the entire fabricated “Deflategate” controversy. As I have said almost from the beginning (see my Blogs to that effect), it was a fabricated attack fueled by ignorance and resentment directed at the New England Patriots — but its wider ramifications concern the ability of established forces to use the media to fabricate a reality for ulterior motives. That’s why I long ago linked it to the Bush Adminstration’s fabrication of a case for its criminal invasion of Iraq. With the so-called “Deflategate” controversy, however, we now have a patently clear demonstration that this alternate reality was fabricated. (Will Mike Francesa at WFAN ever apologize for his outrageous behavior in condemning the Patriots from Day One, and in refusing to countenance any alternative comments on his radio program? But I doubt it.)

For the details, see today’s New York Times article by Joe Nocera;

True Scandal of Deflategate Lies in the N.F.L.’s Behavior

BY JOE NOCERA

A scientific consensus that deflation of footballs in the 2015 A.F.C. title game could be explained by physics has not done anything to mitigate the Patriots’ punishment.

Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://nyti.ms/1PbrjC6

Here’s a brief excerpt from that article:

“John Leonard is a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who roots for the Philadelphia Eagles, listens to sports talk radio when he is exercising, and teaches a class called Measurement and Instrumentation. When the Deflategate story broke after last year’s A.F.C. championship game between the New England Patriots and the Indianapolis Colts, he found himself fixated on it, yearning to dig into it from a scientific point of view….

Numbers in hand, (finally,) Leonard went to work. He bought the same gauges the N.F.L. used to measure p.s.i. levels. He bought N.F.L.-quality footballs. He replicated the temperatures of the locker room, and the colder field. And so on. When he was done, he concluded that Exponent (the company hired by the NFL’s investigators) had made a series of basic errors. Leonard’s work showed the exact opposite of Exponent’s conclusions: The drop in the Patriots’ footballs’ p.s.i was consistent with the Ideal Gas Law; the smaller drop in pressure in the Colts’ balls was not. (Leonard surmises that because the Colts’ balls were tested after the Patriots’ balls, they had warmed up again.)

By early November, he had a PowerPoint presentation with more than 140 slides. By the end of the month, he had given two lectures about Deflategate, the second of which he had videotaped and posted on YouTube. A viewer who watched the lengthy lecture edited it down to a crisp 15 minutes; Leonard agreed to let him post the edited version.

The edited lecture went up on YouTube on Dec. 1 and has been viewed more than 17,000 times. It is utterly convincing. Leonard told me that if an M.I.T. undergraduate made the kinds of mistakes that Exponent made, “I would force them to repeat the experiment and correct the analysis.” Based on his study of the data, Leonard now says: “I am convinced that no deflation occurred and that the Patriots are innocent. It never happened.””

Advertisements

“Deflategate” and the Invasion of Iraq

As Roger Goodell prepares to hear the appeal of Tom Brady, it is perhaps appropriate to reflect on the parody that is so-called deflategate, and to ask ourselves how and why this happened. And what I mean is not how and why the Patriots deflated some footballs, but why and how this manufactured reality was brought about. And it is also to reflect on the lessons to be gleaned from a fabrication of evidence and the media’s rush to judgement that characterized both the football world’s condemnation of the New England Patriots for its purported inflation of footballs and the Bush Administration’s orchestration of the invasion of Iraq due to its supposed possession of weapons of mass destruction. In both cases, I believe, vested interests were able to play on public biases to manipulate a gullible and biased media to create a fabricated reality with significant policy and personal consequences. Of course, so-called “Deflategate” pales in comparison with the significance of the Iraq invasion. That fiasco was probably the worst foreign policy disaster in U.S. history, the destructive consequences of which will almost certainly be with us for the indefinite future. And that, without even considering the human cost in lives killed or mangled, whether American or Iraqi, and civilizations and cultures across the Middle East deranged and devastated. But we can better appreciate the way in which the media can be used to create such a manufactured “reality” by seeing how it was able to manufacture the reality of “Deflategate”.

Let me make clear that my beliefs are based on the facts as so far revealed. A full and independent investigations — should we ever have such, which I doubt — may bring forth new facts that would show that I am in error. Further, I confess to not being a completely impartial observer, since I am a Patriots fan, and would like the evidence to support their innocence. But I have been outraged from the very inception of this situation, by the pervasive bias that led to the Patriots being convicted and almost universally condemned before any investigation even began. And the “evidence” was regularly constructed and presented in such a way as to reinforce that pervasively desired conclusion. We can speculate why that was the case. It is my suspicion that it results from a combination of resentment at their years of success and an orchestrated pre-existent public belief that they are cheaters, as expressed by those who have renamed their coach Bellacheat. But the evidence that is so far available not only does not support that conclusion of their guilt. Far more astounding still is the fact that it suggests that actually NOTHING at all unusual really happened. That the entire “crisis” was fabricated. So let’s look at the facts.

The 12 footballs prepared before the game by the Patriots were measured by the Referee to be at 12.5 PSI, while the Colts footballs were found to be between 13 and 13.1 PSI. (By regulation, they are required to be between 12.5 & 13.5 PSI at game time.) At halftime, the Patriots footballs were measured again, by two different gauges. One found 11 out of 12 to be excessively deflated, being up to 2 PSI below the 12.5 legal limit, while another gauge found 3 out of the 12 to be significantly under-inflated. And then 4 of the Colts footballs were measured, and all were found to be within acceptable limits.

BUT, there were two gauges used, and there was a significant difference in the measurements by the two gauges, with one clearly giving a reading approximately .4 PSI less than the other. The referee who did the initial measurement believes (but is not certain) that he used the gauge that gave the higher reading before the game.

In addition, physics tells us that for every 10 degrees cooler the ambient temperature there is a reduction of air pressure about .4 to .5 PSI. These two facts on their own are quite sufficient to account for the purported “under-inflation” of the Patriots footballs, particularly if you take seriously the Referee’s statement (which the Wells Report discounted) that he used the gauge that gave the higher reading before the game. (Since combining the use of the higher reading gauge before the game with the expected pressure drop due to the outside temperature would be expected to have given a reading at half-time of between 1.5 and 2 PSI below the legal limit.)

But many people claim that the “smoking gun” of Patriot malfeasance is the fact that none of the Colts footballs tested at half-time were found to be under-inflated. But only four of the Colts footballs were in fact tested, and that was because the second-half of the game was about to begin, and the balls were needed for the game. But that fact makes clear that the Colts footballs were only tested toward the very end of the half-time, which means they were sitting inside for almost 15 minutes — far more than enough time for them to regain their original internal pressure, which is only what should have been expected. While the Patriots footballs were obviously tested right at the beginning of half-time, when they would have still been much colder.

In fact, if there’s a real smoking gun, it points in the reverse direction. For a Colt player did intercept a Brady pass in the first half. He then brought the ball to the sidelines and said that he thought it was under-inflated. That ball, taken directly from the cold playing field, was immediately tested, and it was found to have a PSI clearly within an acceptable range. If any ball should have been excessively under-inflated, it would have been one taken directly out of play. But it was not!!

In sum, there is NO evidence that anything unusual happened!!! Only that a reality was contrived to convict the Patriots of cheating for reasons about which we are all free to speculate. But the ability for a manipulable and/or gullible media to create such a false reality in order to promote vested interests should certainly be an object lesson to us all.

Let my last words be those of the recent and highly credible American Enterprise Institute independent investigation of this situation and their highly critical evaluation of the Wells Report. They write in “the Summary of (their) Findings”: “The evidence we present points to a simple—and innocent—explanation for the change in pressure in the Patriots footballs. The Patriots balls were measured at the start of halftime, whereas the Colts balls were measured at the end of halftime, after sufficient time had passed for the balls to warm up and return to their pregame pressure. There is no need to consider the alternative hypothesis—that the Colts illegally inflated their footballs—because a simple physical explanation is available.

The fact that the average pressure of the Colts balls was significantly above the prediction of the Ideal Gas Law, while that of the Patriots balls was not, is inconsistent with the findings of the Wells report. Our conclusion that the warming of the balls during halftime is the key factor overlooked in the Wells report is supported by the observation that the readings of the intercepted Patriots football, measured separately from the other Patriots balls, came in almost precisely at the prediction of the law. Under the hypothesis asserted by the Wells report, the odds of this Patriots ball matching the Ideal Gas Law prediction were between 1 out of 3 and 1 out of 300. It is therefore unlikely that the Patriots deflated the footballs.”

 

 

Is “Deflategate” Just a Lot of Hot Air?

Is “Deflategate” Just a Lot of Hot Air?

The more this “deflategate” issue proceeds, the more it looks like another examplee of ideological thinking at work — where a person becomes committed to a set of beliefs for essential emotional reasons, and then will not let it go no matter what the facts are. Rather, the committed ideologue will twist the facts to conform to his/her pre-conceived belief system. It’s just like the Bush Administration and the commitment to remove Saddam Hussein and “liberate” Iraq.

As information trickles out that increasingly places in doubt the initial conclusion of Patriot deception about the under inflated footballs, many of those who were certain of their “guilt” from day one, are now developing a protective rationale — with the WFAN’s “football guru” Mike Francesa in the lead. His current position is: 1) it’s beyond doubt that the Patriots broke the rules; but 2) the NFL has no intention to adequately investigate the issue, and simply wants the issue to go away; therefore, 3) they will produce a vague report with no finding of guilt, some minor procedural modifications for the future, and that will be the end of that. Thus, by Francesa’s reasoning, the Patriots reman convicted of cheating, the NFL of covering it up, and “case closed.”

Francesca’s reasoning — as well as that of the many others following the same path — reminds me of the Medieval approach to trying witches. If someone was accused of being a witch, the trial might involve tying a heavy weight to the person, throwing them in the water, and then seeing if they floated or drowned. If they floated, they were obviously guilty of being a witch, in line with the devil, and were then put to death, often by burning at the stake. If, on the other hand, they drowned, that would attest to their probable innocence. But in either case, they would be dead.

Similarly with Mike Francesa and those who think like him. Convinced of Patriot guilt they have it set up as follows: If the NFL finds the Patriots gulty, then Francesa is vindicated; If the NFL finds that there is no proof of guilt on the Patriots’ part, then the NFL is itself guilty of a coverup. In either case, the Patriots remain condemned and Francesa vindicated. Heads I win, tails you lose. That’s a nice deal if you can get — but there is no honesty and nor any room for an impartial evaluation of the facts. Just a self-justifying rush to judgement and a public lynching.