That's a weird text. At the beginning the author lists reasons why it's clearly Newton's third law, and then just basically says: "But then an 'authority' on aerodynamics waved hands around telling me it's not. The end." Maybe I misread something, but nowhere in the examples that are apparently inconsistent with Bernoulli's law, and for which the professor claims they actually support it, does he actually provide an explanation.

Sure. A follow-up question I would have asked: how do propellers work? By accelerating large volumes of air, force is generated according to Newton's Second Law. So do wings accelerate large volumes of air? Of course, as one can see at any airport, large vortices trail behind and below the wings of any airplane or glider. So how is a wing different than a propeller?

I didn't say it wasn't complicated. What I said was most lift is due to angle of attack.

The fact is that the percentage of lift that is attributable to angle of attack is far greater than that due to reduction in air pressure across the curved part of the wing.