c******o
发帖数: 282 | | A*****a
发帖数: 52743 | 2 So which gauge did you use, Walt, realizing that there could be a question
later about the inflation of the footballs?
“Well, my best recollection is that I used the one with the long, crooked
needle.”
Is it possible, Walt, that you used the other gauge that was available? You
know, the one that for whatever reason measures the air pressure at 0.3 to 0
.45 PSI lower?
“Well, I don’t know about that. . . .”
Isn’t it possible, Walt?
“Well, it’s certainly possible.”
That’s how investigations that start with a predetermined outcome and work
backward unfold. (Holy crap, I think I’m beginning to agree with Don Yee.)
And that’s why Wells should have concluded based on the scientific evidence
that the question of whether tampering occurred in connection with the AFC
title game is inconclusive.
piece of evidence
【在 c******o 的大作中提到】
: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/10/wells-report-di
| h*********r
发帖数: 10182 | 3 我早就说了，这个wells report就是个bullshit.
赛前没读数.
球压按照裁判的记忆和ideal gas law，pats的球在中场正常球压就是11.3-11.5, 有一
半以上都是合格的。扣子的球是高于正常球压的。
wells就是非要加罪于pats. |
|
