[Maybe he should have stuffed the shirts in his pants instead?]

I have to wonder if a physicist wrinkling some shirts and wearing them under his jacket passes for adherence to the scientific method. It kind of conjures up Far Side images more than anything else, doesn't it? Is this the best Nelson could do, stay up late at night and try on clothes in his bathroom? Did he even try to wrinkle a variety of shirts under a variety of jackets worn by a variety of men? Or was it just him, a shirt or two [sans pocket protector, one would assume], and a jacket?

And let's not forget that Nelson's primary analysis was performed on digital images taken from a video taped image. That's not exactly a first generation sample. Plus, it's not the same surface material that Nelson typically analyzes.

In the enhanced photo of the first debate, Nelson says, look at the horizontal white line in middle of the president's back. You'll see a shadow. "That's telling me there's definitely a bulge," he says. "In fact, it's how we measure the depths of the craters on the moon or on Mars. We look at the angle of the light and the length of shadow they leave. In this case, that's clearly a crater that's under the horizontal line — it's clearly a rim of a bulge protruding upward, one due to forces pushing it up from beneath."

Here's the thing: Nelson and his colleagues are accustomed to analyzing images of planet surfaces, not of presidential clothing. Know why they analyze photographs of planets? Because they can't just hop on over to Mars and take a few measurements in person. So they settle for second best: using images to calculate measurements.

When you're analyzing a photograph of the president, you're settling for second best, too. Nelson really needs to get his hands on that suit, that shirt, and the man who wore them before I'll say he has clear-cut evidence that there was some sort of device under the jacket.

Besides, at this point, does it really matter? When it comes time to vote, Americans have short memories and an amazing ability to look past conflicting information, like whether or not a president who claims to bring integrity to the White House needed to have someone whisper debate answers in his ear. I'm not sure that any undecided voters would care one way or the other if it were really proven that Bush was wired for the debate.

So between now and Election Day, Kerry supporters — scientists and non-scientists alike — would do best to focus on John Kerry and what he can do for our country, and not on George Bush and what he was wearing under his jacket.

[Also published at Bitch Has *Word*]