No, no, I got that very well, that facts are nothing fixed and depend on where the observer is standing.
It's just that I think that people should come up to at least that level, from a level where they're saying, You are yellow and I am brown so you are obviously wrong. Once they do, and we are all agreed that personalities and prejudices shouldn't come into it, we can walk up another flight of stairs and get to what you have stated.
It happens incrementally, chief. Taking them to the top floor is risky; there's always a bozo who wants, needs to look over the unprotected edge.
The problem with that approach is that people coming to that level means that they go to other levels as well. More importantly, a graver issue is that those prejudices and personalities will always come into it and we will never agree.
There is a reason why there are IQ curves and distribution of wealth and knowledge today.
It has to do with education in all disciplines including that of common humanity; the lack of its propagation from inception leads to this inability to leave prejudices that lead to people that support Trump or blow themselves up in a crowd of Shia worshippers.
It is not that they are mostly bad(I believe more in the concept of evil rather than levels of bad or good) people, but people so obsessed with believing that only they have the right path that they are willing to shun any idea of logic. You can being as many facts as you like, but those facts need logic to process.
After all, trying convincing a man who has been taught to think logically and who is blind that it is a fact that many leaves are green due to chlorophyll..and then try convincing one that is illogical and has been told leaves are blue.. even if you restore the eyesight of the illogical one, he will be more likely to reject it as some conspiracy by you to falsly paint leaves green.
In either case, we digress too much.
But to take logic to this thread. Take the proponents of the J-10 and those against it; see what is actual fact (anything from costs to avionics to radar return) true to many aspects of air combat as it is known now, to factless hypothesis on these based on earlier scenarios and some that rarely exist.