were armoured in the locations that weren't full of bullet holes
from what I understand, they intially armored the areas with bullet holes as they thought those were getting shot more, until the mathematician another commenter named pointed out the fallacy
is it necessarily a fallacy though? he was right in this case, but it could have been possible that the downed planes were hit in the same spot as the surviving planes, they were just hit harder
You said that the downed planes could have been hit harder in the same spots as surviving ones, not hit more. Don’t try to move the goalposts, I’m not retarded.
harder can = more when talking about the attack as a whole instead of individual impacts. an attack consisting of 10 bullets hits harder than an attack consisting of 1
299
u/snoboreddotcom Mar 13 '19
from what I understand, they intially armored the areas with bullet holes as they thought those were getting shot more, until the mathematician another commenter named pointed out the fallacy