KillingtonZone.com

From today's New York Times. It's a long read but it explains how the testing was done and how this conclusion was reached:

“We conclude that within the range of game characteristics most likely to have occurred on Game Day, we have identified no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls as compared to the loss in air pressure exhibited by the Colts game balls,” the report said.

The Deflategate Scientists
Unlock Their Lab

The researchers whose work led to Tom Brady’s suspension
have never spoken publicly. Now they’re eager to say
they were right, no matter what Patriots fans believe.


By JOHN BRANCH SEPT. 21, 2016


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/sport ... 74587&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bubba wrote:From today's New York Times. It's a long read but it explains how the testing was done and how this conclusion was reached:

“We conclude that within the range of game characteristics most likely to have occurred on Game Day, we have identified no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls as compared to the loss in air pressure exhibited by the Colts game balls,” the report said.

The Deflategate Scientists
Unlock Their Lab

The researchers whose work led to Tom Brady’s suspension
have never spoken publicly. Now they’re eager to say
they were right, no matter what Patriots fans believe.


By JOHN BRANCH SEPT. 21, 2016


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/sport ... 74587&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Would you expect them to say anything else and look like fools.

SnoBrdr wrote:

Bubba wrote:From today's New York Times. It's a long read but it explains how the testing was done and how this conclusion was reached:

“We conclude that within the range of game characteristics most likely to have occurred on Game Day, we have identified no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls as compared to the loss in air pressure exhibited by the Colts game balls,” the report said.

The Deflategate Scientists
Unlock Their Lab

The researchers whose work led to Tom Brady’s suspension
have never spoken publicly. Now they’re eager to say
they were right, no matter what Patriots fans believe.


By JOHN BRANCH SEPT. 21, 2016


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/sport ... 74587&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Would you expect them to say anything else and look like fools.

So you're questioning their conclusion? If so, on what basis?

Bubba wrote:

SnoBrdr wrote:

Bubba wrote:From today's New York Times. It's a long read but it explains how the testing was done and how this conclusion was reached:

“We conclude that within the range of game characteristics most likely to have occurred on Game Day, we have identified no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls as compared to the loss in air pressure exhibited by the Colts game balls,” the report said.

The Deflategate Scientists
Unlock Their Lab

The researchers whose work led to Tom Brady’s suspension
have never spoken publicly. Now they’re eager to say
they were right, no matter what Patriots fans believe.


By JOHN BRANCH SEPT. 21, 2016


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/sport ... 74587&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Would you expect them to say anything else and look like fools.

So you're questioning their conclusion? If so, on what basis?

This is just one of hundreds of scientists who disputed their "science".

If you actually looked into things instead of trying to troll, you'd know that these "experts at Exponet were the same ones who "proved" that 2nd hand smoke does NOT cause cancer.

Exponet has been proven to be a hired gun who will come to any conclusion that whomever is paying them wants then to reach,

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ls-report/

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/18 ... -2010feb18

SnoBrdr wrote:

Bubba wrote:

SnoBrdr wrote:

Bubba wrote:From today's New York Times. It's a long read but it explains how the testing was done and how this conclusion was reached:

“We conclude that within the range of game characteristics most likely to have occurred on Game Day, we have identified no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls as compared to the loss in air pressure exhibited by the Colts game balls,” the report said.

The Deflategate Scientists
Unlock Their Lab

The researchers whose work led to Tom Brady’s suspension
have never spoken publicly. Now they’re eager to say
they were right, no matter what Patriots fans believe.


By JOHN BRANCH SEPT. 21, 2016


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/sport ... 74587&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Would you expect them to say anything else and look like fools.

So you're questioning their conclusion? If so, on what basis?

This is just one of hundreds of scientists who disputed their "science".

If you actually looked into things instead of trying to troll, you'd know that these "experts at Exponet were the same ones who "proved" that 2nd hand smoke does NOT cause cancer.

Exponet has been proven to be a hired gun who will come to any conclusion that whomever is paying them wants then to reach,

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ls-report/

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/18 ... -2010feb18

That accusation was addressed in the article. Whether you accept their answer or not is up to you.

Bubba wrote:

SnoBrdr wrote:

Bubba wrote:

SnoBrdr wrote:

Bubba wrote:From today's New York Times. It's a long read but it explains how the testing was done and how this conclusion was reached:

“We conclude that within the range of game characteristics most likely to have occurred on Game Day, we have identified no set of credible environmental or physical factors that completely accounts for the additional loss in air pressure exhibited by the Patriots game balls as compared to the loss in air pressure exhibited by the Colts game balls,” the report said.

The Deflategate Scientists
Unlock Their Lab

The researchers whose work led to Tom Brady’s suspension
have never spoken publicly. Now they’re eager to say
they were right, no matter what Patriots fans believe.


By JOHN BRANCH SEPT. 21, 2016


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/sport ... 74587&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Would you expect them to say anything else and look like fools.

So you're questioning their conclusion? If so, on what basis?

This is just one of hundreds of scientists who disputed their "science".

If you actually looked into things instead of trying to troll, you'd know that these "experts at Exponet were the same ones who "proved" that 2nd hand smoke does NOT cause cancer.

Exponet has been proven to be a hired gun who will come to any conclusion that whomever is paying them wants then to reach,

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ls-report/

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/18 ... -2010feb18

That accusation was addressed in the article. Whether you accept their answer or not is up to you.

Nor you, unfortunately it was all up to Roger Goodell.

Mostly, the science behind this dinosaur of a story involved the cell phone.
Bring out yer dead .. Bring out yer dead

brownman wrote:Mostly, the science behind this dinosaur of a story involved the cell phone.
Bring out yer dead .. Bring out yer dead

Yet Hillary's people destroyed 9 devices and the DoJ gave her a pass.

Go figure.

SnoBrdr wrote:

brownman wrote:Mostly, the science behind this dinosaur of a story involved the cell phone.
Bring out yer dead .. Bring out yer dead

Yet Hillary's people destroyed 9 devices and the DoJ gave her a pass.

Go figure.

football is serious sh!t. national security, not so much...