View Single Post
Old 05-27-2020, 05:11 PM   #12 (permalink)
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,060
Thanks: 107
Thanked 1,594 Times in 1,131 Posts
Originally Posted by aerohead View Post
I'd really prefer that you address lift in your own voice. So far,it appears that you have only a rudimentary understanding of lift issues. And I believe that you're unwilling to introspect and self-examine your 'belief' system.
My experience from the mechanical engineering curriculum exposed me to an understanding of fluid dynamics fundamentals which runs counter to some of your thesis. And I freely admit that I'm prejudiced towards, and defer to the expertise of career, PhD level aerodynamics investigators.
If you can scientifically argue against the body of empirical evidence,collected for going on a hundred years, I look forward to it.
Your arrogance is just breathtaking. Not only, apparently, am I wrong - but so are Hucho, Barnard, Katz and Skibor-Rylski.

You have developed a theory of lift that is completely wrong as it applies to any car of the last 30-odd years, but rather than admit that, you continue to defend the indefensible.

No wonder so much of the advice that you give here is wrong.

I don't care if your beliefs include conspiracy theories and incorrect understandings of how lift occurs in cars, and that you haven't kept up with any aerodynamic research of the last 25 or 30 years.

But I do care that you are misleading others. In fact, I think it is disgusting - wasting other people's time and energy through, fundamentally, your arrogant belief that you are right and everyone else is wrong.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JulianEdgar For This Useful Post:
aerohead (05-29-2020)