Quote:
Originally Posted by csu87
Im not sure you really countered anything I said, but rather took the Wells approach of, you say one thing, but Im going to just say something else and take that as the gospel.
As to the science, which is the biggest and key thing here that the report basically says science proves that the balls wouldnt have deflated, here are 2 articles to read. And if you say " Well the 4 balls from the Colts that were tested tested at higher psi than the Pats (albeit, 3 still below the 12.5 limit, but no one cares about that right?)," keep in mind that these balls were tested at the end of halftime, after the balls had a chance to warm up in the equipment room.
Discusses the differences temperatures make on ball psi
https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/cul...y-over-science
Discusses why the method used by the Wells Scientist was flawed
http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/n...d=441003075768 |
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony20009
How would you know that insofar as you haven't "gone through" it? You claimed to have read it, so how hard can it be to find the points in with which you take exception? You write of the "excerpts" I cite to support my assertions, yet cite none that support yours.
And you see, that's why I have yet to accept your arguments. So far, you've made only unsupported assertions. Well, any fool can do that. You gripe about proof, yet offer no specific examples of proof that supports your claims.
Red:
I'd suspected as much, but I'd refrained from saying so. I no longer have to wonder what grade of BS-er you are. You've told us all in no uncertain terms.
All the best.
|
You missed my above quote. Or are you picking and choosing again?
I have gone through the report, but as I'm on my phone, copying and pasting isnt practical.
Those links there more probable than not, disprove the Wells Report. A true debater uses all available information and not just one item.