Skip to main content

Verified by Psychology Today

Environment

The Deflation of Science

Does making either science or footballs easier to handle yield the best results?

Deflategate

With Super Bowl XLIX just a few days away, sports reporters continue to churn out dozens of stories about the fact that most of the footballs from the New England Patriots’ side during the first half of the AFC championship game against the Indianapolis Colts proved to be underinflated. Since this made these balls, which were used by New England’s offense, easier to throw, catch, and handle, many have raised the question of whether the balls were intentionally underinflated. The Patriots’ coach, quarterback, and owner have all insisted on the team’s innocence in this matter. Patriots’ coach Bill Belichick has even floated proposals about how such deflation may have been a consequence of natural processes. In a news conference Belichick spoke to reporters about the physics of football inflation, but twice offered the cautionary comment “I am not a scientist.”

The NFL has undertaken an investigation of the matter that has included hiring both an investigative firm, Renaissance Associates, and a law firm, Paul, Weiss. Apparently, in an attempt to leave no serious possibility unexamined, the law firm has, in fact, contacted physicists at Columbia University to tap their expertise about such matters. Presumably, the law firm takes Belichick at his word and has decided to consult actual scientists. In the last few days, physicists from all over the country have joined the fray.

Evasive Talking Point

Numerous Republican candidates for office in this past election cycle offered Coach Belichick’s response exactly (“I am not a scientist”), when they were queried about their views on climate change. The list of self-avowed, non-scientist Republicans included the leaders of both houses of the new 114th Congress, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Speaker of the House John Boehner of Ohio. Arguably, the claim was both true and an improvement over skepticism, let alone outright denial, concerning climate change, which some Republican legislators continue to profess, including the new chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma.

Taking Science Seriously

What precisely is the claim that these legislators are not scientists alleged to entail? Is it that they are incompetent to speak about or vote on such matters? Probably not, since they regularly speak about and vote on measures pertaining to a host of other issues that involve specialized knowledge. So, for example, they are also not rocket scientists, in particular, but this does not stop them from speaking about and voting on matters pertaining to space exploration.

Recognizing that the people’s representatives will, inevitably, face issues about which they know very little, it would seem a priority to elect people who are willing and able to learn. It also seems to make sense that they would proceed similarly to the way the NFL’s attorneys from Paul, Weiss have proceeded with regard to Deflategate. Instead of avoiding the issue with an evasive talking point, they have enlisted the aid of scientists at one of the world’s most prestigious research universities to consider the matter at hand.

Admittedly, the future of the earth’s climate is a considerably more complicated matter than the deflation of footballs. Still, part of responsibly engaging science is learning how to assess the state of scientific research on a topic. (His critics note that Senator Inhofe does not seem to understand the difference between television’s weather reporters and professional scientists at the world’s leading research universities and institutes who have devoted their careers to studying the earth’s climate.) Rather than focusing on a few outliers or pseudo-experts, our representatives need to attend to the best measures of the opinion of the relevant population of professional research scientists. To fail to do so deflates both the institutions of science and scientific knowledge. That may make science easier to manage and throw around, but that is no fairer or more balanced than one team playing with deflated footballs.

advertisement
More from Robert N. McCauley Ph.D.
More from Psychology Today