@aerohead,
Thank you, but you failed to prove that "boundary layers" have any bearing on the topic. Perhaps you'd like to explain for the benefit of all.
@ChazInMT,
Now you're just being mean. You make all sorts of statements based upon assumption, but you fail to show proof for your position. It is too bad you cannot be courteous with your opinion.
Here are a few of your assumptions:
1 You stated, "Apparently I wasn't direct enough for you, so I'll say it all here in plain English.". Evidently, you thought you were needing to be direct. Instead, you should have been plain and clear and non-confrontational.
2. "stymies the imagination" Really? Could it be that your imagination is weak?
3. "even a bunch of morons understand that, without attached flow, an aerodynamically low drag Cd cannot be achieved.". Wow! You just alienated all astronautical engineers everywhere.
4. Your fourth paragraph is a straw-man argument. It is meaningless, in this context, that many have doubts. It is also weird that you would point out that no one else has tried to test it. How ironic. The fact is that if something has been tested and shown, then others must prove it wrong, not the other way around. Since you state that no one else has tested it, then what is your point? You take a very unscientific position.
5. I appreciate your statement of "that's all I need to hear". That may indeed be good enough for you. It isn't for me. I want to see practical proof of someone's position, not theoretical assumptions. Theories are not, and never will be, facts.
6. You need to let Eakers and aerohead speak for themselves. I don't believe they need you to be their apologist.
Need I go on?
It is amazing how people make the worst assumptions about others. Can't you just assume the best? After all, that is what common courtesy is all about. Why do you think you need to "slam" someone?
For everyone's benefit let me state that the cornerstone of scientific research has always been, and will always be, observation. One of the correct assumptions about that fact is that it should be easy to make clear to even a grade-school-educated person what one is trying to get across. When a person who claims to know scientific fact cannot do that, they are a failure and are ignorant of the facts; as Albert Einstein said.
It was never my intention to offend anyone, but rather try to nudge people into being able to prove what they say with observable and easily duplicated facts. That some feel they are being attacked only shows their inability to prove their points to the benefits of all those reading these posts.
This is a place to share one's knowledge and questions and experiences. Those who do not want to take part in a polite manner should not be involved. Please go troll somewhere else.
Thank you.