There will always be facts (or biases or perspectives) in play that a particular participant in a given situation won't have... and the presence of those facts (or biases or perspectives) should never tend to invalidate the specific perspective of someone, yet all through the Delta threads people invalidate and dismiss the stories (perspective) of posters (some frankly in very obtuse ways).

Perhaps this occurs in other threads also (not generally in the other threads I participate in).

Case in point: Four people standing in a line watching an accident happen will see and accurately describe four different accidents. Each one's perspective will provide an accurate rendition of the events, and their assessment on the "what caused it" portion of the accident will be significantly impacted by their own perspective.

The OP in this case presented his perspective on events he experienced. I see no reason why an adult conversation wouldn't include various brainstorming on how the activity (or his perspective) was impacted by other events or facts. But attacking him for posting it? Or criticizing him for posting it? Criticizing his review of what he experienced? How does that serve to benefit anyone?

NOT supporting someone's post (or perspective) on FT doesn't require an attack. There are several examples in this thread of people who disagree and are clearly respective of the OP's opinion / perspective. But there are others that really should be moderated out of the thread (all threads?).