Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
So David didn't use a sling to kill goliath and golf clubs which are rotating around an axis can't possibly hit a ball onto a small target two hundred yards away.
The basic premise of Marshall's hypothesis, linear application of force, is wrong and any mechanical engineer with an understanding of pitching and dynamics would realize it pretty quickly. I learned dynamics from the guy who wrote the book (literally) and I'm telling you that whoever accepted that article for publication should have their credentials reviewed.
The basic premise of Marshall's hypothesis, linear application of force, is wrong and any mechanical engineer with an understanding of pitching and dynamics would realize it pretty quickly. I learned dynamics from the guy who wrote the book (literally) and I'm telling you that whoever accepted that article for publication should have their credentials reviewed.
Don't worry, CADad, Mech Eng Mag for the Web is about as serious in the engineering world as Marshall's web site is within the baseball world.
It's not as though this web-mag is peer-reviewed or meant for disseminating actual research results--it exists to sell advertising on the web.
Marshall does not have even a single article published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. That is because his many bombastic claims are supported by nothing more than proclamation--there is no data to support Marshall's fantastic claims. He does not do, or even attempt to do, legitimate research. He just proclaims superiority in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
It's not as though this web-mag is peer-reviewed or meant for disseminating actual research results--it exists to sell advertising on the web.
Marshall does not have even a single article published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. That is because his many bombastic claims are supported by nothing more than proclamation--there is no data to support Marshall's fantastic claims. He does not do, or even attempt to do, legitimate research. He just proclaims superiority in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Here is just one of the absurd comments Marshall makes in his "Web Exclusive" MEM article, written in fluent pseudo-scientific b.s.-ese:
"A. The Traditional Pitching Motion
The following are force application techniques with which the traditional baseball pitching motion violates Sir Isaac Newton’s Law of Inertia."
----------------
I informed Marshall a long time ago that physical laws cannot be "violated" by a pitching motion that he doesn't like. Newton's principles of motion describe the way the universe works at a macroscopic level and they are not violated by anyone, not even by Marshall's ridiculous pitching motion. Marshall has been made aware more than once that he is selling snake-oil, and he is using Newton's name in such a way to make it appear that the great scientist's work supports Marshall and refutes the traditional pitching motion. And this b.s. type of manipulation is further passed along by guys like Yardbird, who can't be bothered to understand science (try one more time to read and understand the Fleisig study of Marshall's pitchers, Yardbird).
It is really reprehensible that a faker like Marshall spreads the nonsensical idea that physical laws can be "broken" or "violated" in the same sense that man-made civil and criminal laws can be broken or violated.
If he really doesn't know better, he's just ignorant. If he does know better, and I suspect he does by now, then Marshall is quite a bit worse than simply ignorant.
That even a "Web-only" version of MEM would allow this kind of tripe under their banner speaks very poorly of their editorial process, if they have one.
"A. The Traditional Pitching Motion
The following are force application techniques with which the traditional baseball pitching motion violates Sir Isaac Newton’s Law of Inertia."
----------------
I informed Marshall a long time ago that physical laws cannot be "violated" by a pitching motion that he doesn't like. Newton's principles of motion describe the way the universe works at a macroscopic level and they are not violated by anyone, not even by Marshall's ridiculous pitching motion. Marshall has been made aware more than once that he is selling snake-oil, and he is using Newton's name in such a way to make it appear that the great scientist's work supports Marshall and refutes the traditional pitching motion. And this b.s. type of manipulation is further passed along by guys like Yardbird, who can't be bothered to understand science (try one more time to read and understand the Fleisig study of Marshall's pitchers, Yardbird).
It is really reprehensible that a faker like Marshall spreads the nonsensical idea that physical laws can be "broken" or "violated" in the same sense that man-made civil and criminal laws can be broken or violated.
If he really doesn't know better, he's just ignorant. If he does know better, and I suspect he does by now, then Marshall is quite a bit worse than simply ignorant.
That even a "Web-only" version of MEM would allow this kind of tripe under their banner speaks very poorly of their editorial process, if they have one.
So my son violates Newton's laws...I knew he was a troublemaker.
At least your boy is in good company, MTS. LOL!
