VOR-DME writes:

I am dubitative of the pertinence of one’s expertise in simulation having
never experienced the genuine activity being simulated. However, we’ve
explored the possibility that mitigating factors, be they medical, pecuniary
or other could make this the only real option. This is fine, however to
profess any sort of expertise in the matter this shortfall would have to be
compensated by an even greater study of the subject. This does not appear to
be the case with MX.

My posts are too few on USENET to make any assessment possible. I've been
interested in aviation and have studied it since childhood, and I recall
reading my first ground-school textbook at the age of around six (it belonged
to my father).

This statement is an open gate to a vast sea of ignorance. The topic of
transfer of experience from simulation to real flight, the role of _realism_
and its subset of components (visual, motion, audio, cockpit resource
management, I could go on and on) are the subject of a large number of
published scholarly works and an even greater number of doctoral theses. All
of this ongoing study is tacitly predicated on the assumption that the above
statement is impertinent at best, and probably patently false.

The role of simulation in training and research continues to increase. If it
were not realistic, this would not be the case.

Some pilots have a great deal of their self-esteem invested in their pilot
licenses. These pilots tend to reject simulation summarily because it dilutes
the prestige they imagine to be associated with their licensing and thus dents
their egos. Not all pilots have this type of mental block against simulation,
however, and those who do not may enjoy simulation greatly (albeit not as much
as flying in a real airplane). Most pilots cannot afford to fly a real
airplane during all of their waking hours, so those who reject simulation are
denying themselves considerable aviation-related enjoyment.

Another statement that reveals a very shallow depth of inquiry and a
superficial understanding of simulation, aside the fact that it is simply
untrue.

Some people adapt better than others.

I note that those who refuse to take simulation seriously never enjoy it,
whereas those who do take it seriously find it great fun and sometimes useful
in practical ways that apply to their flights in real aircraft.

There is a serious side to simulation though, and is clear that MX is not well
versed in the subject.

How so?