Maggie's Farm

I am a bit sympathetic to those who are intimidated by mathematical models. I used to have a child like faith in them myself, until I had to work in an environment where they were routinely used. They are a tool, in our case, used to design and engineer complex RF switches, switches that have multiple sensors, subassemblies, feedback loops, and whose subassemblies, in turn, have their own sensors, multiple subassemblies, and multiple feedback loops, etc. I can’t tell you how many times an ingenious, state of the art solution to a problem worked on paper and failed in the assembled product. It isn’t easy to accommodate for different materials, temperatures, pressures, energy inputs, speed, chemical environments, humidity all interacting together ………..EVEN IN A CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT, where the variables are known. I have observed how a seemingly minute change in value can cut down or be amplified as it works its way through the system, with unintended consequences (we called it a cascading effect) and vice versa. We weren't dealing with biological systems but with materials that were primarily inert and the presence of gases was minimized. It takes real hubris to insist you know what you can’t know. The difference between us and academics is that our models eventually had to consistently match, the customer’s required spec, overtime in the real world, or we didn’t get paid. In any case, it can’t be said often or emphatically enough, a model is a TOOL, not an end in itself.

Hearings so far: pfft
It's hard for me to believe the Dems were bluffing. If.....if this was a bluff from the get go, why did the Dems call their own bluff?

Just in time for Thanksgiving at the in-laws.