"Hilton" wrote in message
ink.net...
You wrote "Had his definition of lift been correct, he would have been
exactly correct." Ummm, OK. But lift is well-defined

Actually, part of the problem is that "lift" is poorly defined. It means
different things in different contexts.

and it is not
defined as the force that opposes weight.

Actually, most basic aviation texts written for pilots DO define lift as
"the force that opposes weight". You should not be faulted for having never
read one; after all, the texts certainly gloss over many important facts,
and it's not necessary to have studied one to become a pilot. But many
pilots DO use them as a reference, and they DO define lift in exactly the
way you seem to think they do not.

So, you can redefine whatever you want, doesn't make it right.

I'm not the one doing the "redefinition". The word "lift" is simply not a
technical term. You can get closer by using the phrase "aerodynamic lift",
but ultimately you simply need to know in what context you're using the
word.

Pete