Folks who learned aerodynamics from magazine articles and books written for pilots will be dismayed to learn that everything they know is wrong.
This is a bit of an overstatement, as some of you have noted. I haven't seen anything that Doug wrote that contradicts anything I've seen that Ted has written. This isn't a book on stability and control or airplane performance, but about nitty-gritty fluid mechanics. This book doesn't address the usual stunt topics. Other than learning better the stuff I sat through in school, I hope to find out from it how to fix hunting and where to put vortex generators.
Doug does go out of his way to refute the "simplified" explanations of how wings work that we all read as kids: the "equal transit time" explanation of lift, the idea of Bernoulli and Newton being at odds or of having separate, equivalent explanations, the Coanda effect as an explanation of why air follows the curve of an airfoil, and particularly about causality between pressure and velocity over a wing. He justifies treating air as a continuum, from which you can calculate stuff, rather than as particles, which won't get you anywhere. He straightens us out about what Reynolds number is. It ain't the ratio of inertial to viscous forces, as I've heard and passed along.
Reading all that junk probably didn't do us much harm, but it did get in the way of us being able to figure stuff out. We learned the "equal transit time" explanation of lift, but pretty much dismissed it as irrelevant when we saw that symmetrical airfoils work and that airplanes can fly upside down. It's sorta like teaching kids that babies come from storks. It's a quick explanation, but it's wrong and leaves out some kinda interesting phenomena.