I've a bit more time now than this morning, so I'll offer a response in two parts to the OP, as I am one of the "patriarchs" in question.
Part the First:
There's lots of info on the web, some good, some not so good, some bad, some dangerous. What's difficult is sorting out where information is coming from, and whether it's good or bad, whether the source is reliable (quickly think of the currently circulating quote from Joseph Goebbels about making a lie big enough to believe - just you TRY to pinpoint where he said it. Looks like maybe he didn't.) What happens on every forum in every walk of life - horticulture, autoracing, fancy horses... whatever, is that there is a certain crowd of... lay-men... for lack of a better term, who believe they have expertise. Genuine expertise shows up once in awhile, tries to be helpful, and then runs away because there are more lay-men who "know" better.
So an example from the pipe world - someone might make a claim about something like Corsican briar being better than Algerian. And this will be backed up by some or other anecdote. A briar cutter and a pipe maker of 20 years could come in and explain about regional variations in briar, about how some mills buy from all over the mediterranean (that is, briar supply is not localized). About curing methods in the past and present. And the result of all these efforts to educate, is that the lay-man believes whatever he believes cuz reasons. Because that's what he heard, that's what his infallible tobacconist told him.. whatever. The ivory Dunhill dot is a GREAT example of this. Isn't Ivory, never was, but we ALL KNOW IT WAS!
This leads people (again I'm not just talking about pipes) who have expertise gained from firsthand experience over many years to AVOID conversations with lay-men who do not want to become educated. It leaves pipe forums devoid of pipe makers mostly (case in point here). Engine forums devoid of mechanics, and plant forums devoid of horticulturists proper.
Part the Second.
Plug, I came after you because I've watched you say things I think are untrue of pipes in general, and expensive pipes in particular, but really what got me is that you pulled out of the gate doing something called "begging the question" which technically occurs in an argument when you assume the conclusion in one of your premises. Look it up. In particular you said this "He drills a non-engineered straight line through the shank into the bowl, at the bottom and centered. No engineering here. But he does take extra time with the stem and uses a variety of tools to promote the airflow through it. He opens the stem but uses no engineering principles in doling so. Also of note are the final two sentences which clearly state that hours spent on minute features, which might amount to engineering, produce little or no airway improvement."
And I disagree with it, more particularly your assumption that no engineering principles are involved, and I told you why, and included some of the technical references you might go and educate yourself with - Bernoulli's principles for example.
So where this leaves you.... I dunno.
:
