LOL, that's like crying "Appeal to Law" when arguing case law.
Suck it up buttercup. Two can play with words.
Don't include me in that "YOU people". I simply suggest it was pretty good back then. I did say it would be an expensive project for the returns these days, too.
Wrong. Not my whole argument.You're whole argument rests on the appeal to probability...
I did post a few facts I found and you haven't refuted them. And I have not been suggesting the Arrow was the top of all tops of planes on the planet.
Oh, you have been. I just joined in after you.
Why not? You earned it, lol.
So you say, lol.
You posted little, I refuted what you posted, I don't refute whole links, lol.
LOL! Then why are you arguing with me?
BS.
lol Your opinion.
Why not? You can't have the whole floor 24/7
No you didn't.
Never said you did.
Because you're making silly claims about me and exaggerating your position by belittling other people's..
It came back to you? Go figger.
Oh I see, you have nothing left, and this is it.
This the chart you were gibbering about and hinging your entire argument against the other spects of the Arrow on? It's got two stats in it having to do with performance. And even then it doesn't say which version of the Arrow it is referring to.
American style jingoism doesn't suit you Juan.
It definitely did, I agree. So why don't we let it stand on what it was, without the hyperbole and myth?
Nope. Looks like you implied it, though. Either way, I don't bash easily and it didn't occur to me that you'd try to bash me anyway.
Wondering what chart you were referring to.
