Greg of Auto and Airplanes has asked for a Debate

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

If he promises to say "bomber maaaaaaaaaaaaffffffiiiiiaaaaaaaaaaaaa" in less than a minute I may watch, but not on his platform. Setting up a "debate" with someone you ignore / insult and actually block/ remove is slightly ridiculous, well completely ridiculous now I have thought about it.
 
I did log in just to make my comment about accepting his challenge - no reply. At my request ObtuseOscelotcut and paste my comment to Greg but he replied that he had not seen the comment - AFAIK he will not respond.

Andrew Horton, that Greg mentioned - is a friend and I left a mssage with him that I would rather produce a Range show with him rather than help Greg monetize his threads.

I know several other characters that will gladly debate him - for example Chris Fahey, Delta captain/historian/Planes of Fame pilot - that I am passing the link to.
 
Good on you for sticking to your guns and not "debating" with someone who'd probably one, ignore you and the facts, and two, seems to be a bit of an ass when confronted with such facts. I did watch one of his videos, and I wasn't really impressed anyways, full disclosure.
 
drgondog said:
Andrew Horton, that Greg mentioned - is a friend and I left a mssage with him that I would rather produce a Range show with him rather than help Greg monetize his threads.
Click to expand...
Ah that's a great point! And being that his channel is far from neutral territory he'll most likely do his best to control and manipulate the narrative in his favor. You'd never get a fair shake in that sort of scenario.
 
DarrenW said:
Ah that's a great point! And being that his channel is far from neutral territory he'll most likely do his best to control and manipulate the narrative in his favor. You'd never get a fair shake in that sort of scenario.
Click to expand...
Greg is 'pondering' my challenge, has two others for consideration, and will let me know Monday. Independent of my inclusion Andrew will produce the show.

My feeling is that I will probably not be his first choice. In the email exchange I outlined my reasons for criticizing his judgment regarding 'potential vs actual' P-47D range pre-P-47D-25. They are all sourceable.
 
In related news, the Unauthorized History of the Pacific War Podcast channel on YouTube did a review of episode four of Masters of the Air. In passing they mentioned the lack of long-range escort fighter and the coming of the P-51. Yes, as you likely guessed, the Greg acolytes appeared in the comments. There's been three so far.
 
Greg likes to talk, because his hours of videos pay and cannot readily quoted. Just on the subject of P-47 range he has said many things in many places which contradict each other and despite taking down comments where he is wrong he includes those comments in his latest revisions to his "bomber mafia" theory. Before any debate takes place he should state his definitive position in writing, and why his videos dont agree with it.
 
He is debating wheher or not he will accept my challenge. Your point is one I have raised -
 
Last edited:
I have asked for specific definitions for 'bomber mafia' and name them as well as statements/facts he believes associate those individuals with conspiracy to deprive P-47 of combat tanks.

I won't bother with more groundrules unless and until it is 'game on' but will insist that the routes for both 1st and 3rd BD be used to illustrate the track of the escort - from R/V and the target(s). Probably Don Caldwell's mission map for August 17th
 
By agreement it will be after April 15th.

Recent exchange - Greg is hesitant to specify the precise debate topic (s) other than P-47 Range. I am insisting on more specificity. We shall see.

'Hi Greg -
Quoting you, "You know what the debate question is."

Well, debate about P-47 range is rather vague without the context you wish to convey.

For clarification, please codify the debate 'question' and specifically how your POV is different from what I just proposed? More specifically, how are the below points Not the arguments you posed about the P-47 as Long Range escort in ETO.

For your consideration the Debate topic(s) could be:

  1. "There was never a requirement for the P-51B Mustang as The Long Range Fighter for 8th Air Force in Europe. Properly managed the P-47C &D had all the requisites to perform target escort to any target in Germany in 1943". From there you introduce your findings and summarize for your audence. My job would be to rebut.
  2. "The P-47C &D airframe development and combat tank capabilities were inadequately supported/hindered by AAF leadership in developing their long range escort potential in 1943 - a direct cause of the catastrophic casualties the 8th AF suffered from late July through October 1943.
  3. Other than 1 & 2?
 
drgondog said:
I think the recording format will be a zoom call, moderated and recorded by FliteLineMedia - and then posted to YouTube.
Click to expand...

I would suggest recording it for yourself as a hedge against any selective editing being done before the file being posted. Then at least you'd have an unedited copy if needed. If it turns out to not be needed, you can always delete it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

W
Greg's Airplanes & Automobiles: Most Accurate Allied Bomber, or Fighter Bomber of WW2. (European Theater)
Replies
8
Views
851
SaparotRob
Fork-Tailed Devils: WWII's Twin-Boom Airplanes and Beyond [VIDEO]
Replies
0
Views
130
Dronescapes
M
New Build Copies Of WW2 Luftwaffe Airplanes
Replies
1
Views
788
Gnomey
A Day In The Life Of A WW2 Fighter Pilot - Jim Mitchell
Replies
1
Views
359
Gnomey
Another 'Gem' from Greg - just released.
16 17 18
Replies
341
Views
25K
33k in the air
Menu
Log in
Register