>> I am heavily dependent on reading glasses, but I DON'T WEAR THEM TO DRIVE.
> Now you stepped in it... > > -MT
> >> I am heavily dependent on reading glasses, but I DON'T WEAR THEM TO DRIVE.
You dont' understand, of course, my point.
The science, so called, you believe in, is totally wrong and against
the plain evidence of the facts.
I do not know why it is so.
> Bigtime! Now we will have to hear how wearing minus lenses
> eliminates presbyopia.
Presbyopia you can eliminate easily without any glasses, just learning
the proper use of the eyes, memory and imagination.
> 1) People who do little near work have low incidence of myopia.
Not true.
> 2) When same population starts doing near work, myopia skyrockets.
Not true for all. Explain why AT LEAST ONE gets no mypia.
> 3) Plus lenses don't help, so focus isn't the cause
I don't like plus lenses, but since the PILOT who wears them just
starts exercising his vision with a snellen chart, to me it is a good
work to do.
> 4) But there must be some OTHER cause -- prism? gravity/axis?
Discard this. The causes for imperfect sight are plainly in sight: it
is strain to see.
> 5) May not be good to cure. I'd rather wear distance vision
> glasses than readers. Larger tolerances.
You'd rather be cured by rest methods.
And return as God created you, without spectacles.