Then you should equally love that he ignored my second, and most important, point. The first point was simply funny: that he obviously didn't know what the cadences were used in hour record attempts while if you google around a bit you'll see that I'm very familiar with them -- and have been for years.

No, the main point was the one he ignored: that all of the hour record attempts were done not only in a relatively small range of cadence but also in a relatively small range of pedal force or crank torque. The thing is, pedal cadence is obvious to outside onlookers but pedal force and crank torque aren't so cycling mythology has been built up around cadence rather than force or torque. Looking at the cadence of hour record attempts is about as relevant to new riders as looking at the pedal force of hour record attempts is. That's especially true since every one of the hour record attempts is done on a track, on a fixed gear bike, while the OP is riding a bike on a real road with real hills against real winds and probably on a multi-geared bike.

So, unlike you, I understand the point of his statement and his earlier argument. It's just that I've spent the time to actually study the topic. Advising a new road rider to keep his cadence in a narrow band like has been done in this thread is not only baseless, it's actually contraindicated. Focusing on cadence is a red herring. It makes about as much sense as telling new riders to focus on their pedaling technique.