Is it really surprising?
No, not really. As a matter of fact, it actually makes sense since one who has accepted an advancement of technology into a specific role is more likely to accept the continued advancement of that technology.
For a pilot to advocate against a specific technology simply and solely because it may eliminate his position is no better than those calvary officers who based their arguments that the horse mounted soldier would never disappear on the fact that they were calvary officers. I, for one, think that we are a LOOONNNGGG way from having machines that I would trust with a shoot/don't shoot decision (too many chances of anomalies with synthetic VID, EID, etc), but I would rather debate the subject based on intellectual honesty and an open mind than on parochialism.