Aerobatic wings are symmetrical. Lift is proportional to CL, which is related to angle of attack:

https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/WindTunnel/Activities/lift...

Most non-aerobatic wings are asymmetrical because it produces lift at zero angle of attack, and also because it results in a lower stall speed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camber_(aerodynamics)

Source? The whole article basically argues against this view. What is your evidence to say AOA only contributes 10%?

This is common misconception probably coming from level flight situation. Commercial aircraft wings are made for adequate lift in takeoff and minimal drag in level flight. Which encourages building wings that generate all necessary lift in level flight while being relatively "flush".

> As one can see, the popular explanation, which fixates on the shape of the wing, may satisfy many but it does not give one the tools to really understand flight.

Well, apparently that is it! That also explains why planes don't slam into the ground when flying upside down.

Consider how flaps are shaped. When extended they increase the angle of attack; not the ratio of air travel distance.

Generally, when flaps and slats are extended, they increase the camber of the airfoil, increasing the Coefficient of Lift for the same AoA. Also, the air gaps introduced at the junctions between slats/flaps and the main wing re-energize the boundary layer on the top surface of the wing to retard flow separation on the upper surface (becomes a concern because of the increased camber).

They actually do both, depending on their deployment.