Cirrus writes:

But your previous comment is EXTREMELY insulting:

It's an accurate description of the people it references (the kiddies
and children), who unfortunately are very common on USENET. Someone
who counts himself among the kiddies and children might feel insulted,
particularly since people in these categories tend to take everything
as an insult. There's nothing I can do about that.

Children? Noise?- ouch......

Why ouch?

You want serious discussion?

Always.

It's not that you are a sim pilot that bothers some people- it's
your ego. If you were a little more humble, you' would see that.

If people are bothered by me, they should avoid me. Such people
aren't likely to be willing or able to participate in a normal
discussion, so interaction with them is usually a waste of time.

Since you do seem to know so much, why do you come here?

If I knew so much, I would not ask questions.

However, I long ago learned--the hard way--that most people are
blowing smoke when they answer questions. I don't take answers at
face value unless I know from long personal interaction with a person
that he has an excellent track record for giving reliable answers.
Few people are in that category. On USENET, almost everyone is
posturing, so all responses must be taken with a large grain of salt.

A good way to explore the validity of an answer is to question it.
Most people giving good answers can effortlessly support them and can
easily explain why they have chosen those answers; not only does this
make the answer much safer to accept, but it can also provide a lot of
interesting additional information. People blowing smoke simply
become emotional and resort to personal attacks, and I promptly write
off anything they've said.

Discussion is all about different points of view, but you can't
pick and choose answers you like and cast judgement on the ones you
don't.

Why not? I like answers that are supported by sound reasoning based
on acceptable premises. I ignore answers that amount to unsupported
assertions. Credentials are not a factor, in part because (1)
credentials are not reliable, and (2) everyone on USENET is a
self-appointed world expert in everything.

Especially if you aren't a pilot(in this case).

Being a pilot isn't a guarantee of anything, unfortunately, except
that one holds a pilot's license. As a group, pilots are likely to
know more about aviation than non-pilots, but this general observation
is useless for predicting the reliability of individuals who call
themselves pilots. I've encountered too many pilots who blithely
contradict extremely reliable sources of aviation information. I
don't call pilots on their mistakes, as a general rule, in order to
avoid embarrassment; but I do silently write them off.

What I find revealing is how often "pilots" cannot even agree among
themselves. If they knew as much as they believe themselves to know,
they would not provide wildly varying answers to so many of the same
questions. I try to extract a majority opinion from the serious
answers I receive, and I compare this with whatever other sources I
can locate for answers to the same questions. If all goes well, I
eventually learn something useful.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.