Of whom. You mistake my meaning. They have an distinct distrust for institutional elements in aikido. It is not a criticism, per se, skepticism of authority is healthy. It is simply a very strong perspective of theirs. It can stand a little balancing of points of view in the discussion.
There ya go....equivocating again... what you say is not what you mean, and what you mean to say is never meant...
Distrust of institutional elements? That's a rather strong accusation.... and I don't think that really is the case. As for balanced perspectives... that's questionable too... although I s'pose you could technically say a diametrically opposed "model"... is "balanced".
It is more correct to say that mechnical terms that they use do not explain the energy manipulation advantages gained. I do not imply mine is completely correct, merely that it explains far more than theirs can, both in concentrating and dissipating energy of large magnitude.
That it is far more involved than the (simplified) mechanistic examples that have been used, is absolutely true. However, the reasons for doing so were made clear initially - they are intended to convey "first" principles. (If they were not, I apologize - it should have been made clear).
As far as your model goes toward explaining far more than what Dan & Mike have said, that's what YOU claim... and according to YOU. Whether your claim is correct or not is a totally separate issue. More is not necessarily better, nor does it make it more correct.
Unless you mean something else altogether???