|
I'm not trying to fan the flames here. I agree that opinions are opinions. But what happens when those opinions are based on respected primary/secondary sources.
The primary sources would be the german records, however complete. They can help prove something DID happen but can not prove something did not happen.
A primary source can also be the pilot's reports and subsequent records. These do indeed state what he did, what he thought he did, or what he claimed he did, depending on one's interpretation.
A secondary source would be the GOGs book which in a previous thread ("GOGS patronized" or something like that) in which Jasta used these references and cited them extensively to form his opinion.
Can we pick and choose when we are going to accept a source as worthwhile or inaccurate based on if it supports our belief? I can understand using other sources to refute a claim but I can't see dismissing outright simply beause it isn't what we want to hear.
This is not an attack on Bishop. This is also not an attack on Jasta or Al. It is simply some thoughts that have come to mind while reading these heated debates.
I wasn't hear for the first major Bishop debate so I don't know how much of this was aready answered.
As Al knows the only thing I seriously doubt about Bishop was that he attacked Voss's Jasta, which has long been dismissed by most authorities. I don't have serious doubts that he attacked an aerodrome, I just doubt it was Voss's.
Tobias
|