yes, and that whole source is shit.

like the first point that:

or this trillion-dollar-plus investment we get a plane far slower than a 1970s F-14 Tomcat, a plane with less than half the range of a 40-year-old A-6 Intruder, a plane whose sustained-turn performance is that of a 1960s F-4 Phantom, and a plane that had its head handed to it by an F-16 during a recent dogfight competition.

this are the things that a person with zero understanding of modern combat would say. the F-14 tomcat is a twin engine pure interceptor, it is literally designed to be fast and intercept bombers, the F-35 is a multirole fighter with no need for that much speed,but for fuel efficiency. and turnfights like that against the F-16 basically never happend, so that's blatantly irrelevant too.

as for the A6 intruder, it's basically a big fuel tank with wings. no radar, basically no sensors, no afterburner,it's just a light ground attack aircraft. oh, and it has a top speed below mach 1, wich just so happends to be very efficient.

oh funny thing, the title for the article about the F-16 dogfight is "pilot admits the F-35 can't dogfight" as if there's some grand conspiracy.

this are not journalists, this are drama-generating dumbfucks that don't give a fuck about the actual aircraft, they just want those sweet sweet bucks from brainlets like you that just take them at their words. the F-35 is a great aircraft,don't forget it.