Inclusivity is a premise for successful scientific discourse in the endeavor of gaining a broader understanding. In this work therefore, we elicit different "schools of thought" in the context of flight physics for reducing unconsciously exclusionary practices. For decades aerodynamic lift explanations have been a highly controversial topic in PER – and they still are. However, the discussion has always been mainly driven by disjunct models and hermeneutical arguments. This paper tries to carve out empirically different "schools of thoughts" by asking 400+ university students at different institutions about their agreement to various explanations for aerodynamic lift. The study was accompanied by the expert-validated Flight Physics Concept Inventory (FliP-CoIn) and therefore can differentiate what high performers, low performers and flight instructors think. The results surprised even the authors: Among many other findings, this study revealed that – within ONE mind – naive concepts can coexist with expert concepts and that this phenomenon is especially prevalent among high scoring individuals of the FliP-CoIn instrument.