I started the thread in an attempt to discuss why no one from here will acknowledge that almost all of those who come to these seminars switch and start training this way. Those are almost impossible odds. As outrageously successful as an outcome as you could hope for. It is far beyond anything -I- ever imagined would happen.
I wanted to discuss that. In and of itself it offers compelling credibility to the discussion that we have been having on the boards.
At the very least, if we address that topic alone, we can move forward with the fact that there must be something to this to convince so many credible teachers.
I think people do acknowledge it...it's what got my attention, and I assume a good number of others too. When I first began to read what people were saying about "internals" and its relationship to Aikido, I took it as another "what if" to be considered. After tracking the conversations more, I noticed exactly what you described: almost everyone not only enjoyed the effects of the training (perceived an instant applicability), but also the process itself. The negative results I saw posted had more to do with rhetoric style than anything else.
I think part of the difficulty is that there have only been a handful of experts (relatively speaking, at least) even willing to talk about it; supplemental understanding has always been provided by students of those experts. For a long time I only ever saw three names brought up: yours, Mike's, and Akuzawa's. So we (I, at least) only saw a fairly small group of people represented. Now that we have a few more names to consider I think it helps. As time moves on and Aikiweb folks include other groups who are willing to talk about the bits that lend themselves to conversation, I think it will get even better and the cynicism will diminish.
Of course, as has been mentioned plenty of times before, a lot of this stuff is considered a trade secret...which doesn't exactly lend itself to open disussions with strangers, so we're relying on people who are more interested in brining things out into the light. Add to that the fact that you're forced to deal with ignorant and forgetful people like me who ask the same questions, etc., and I can see why many people are reluctant to participate. Human interactions are sloppy enough with like-minded folks, add the diversity of the internet and it can get interesting fast
So the short answer for me (for the problem of accepting the evidence presented online), again, has to do with accessibility and relatability. The greater our efforts in these reagrds, the more people will open their mind to the "evidence" being presented here.