I think you under estimate how well a lard omelet would be accepted on this forum. 
I eat the Italian “Lardo”, so I would try an omelette. The best pie crusts I made with leaf lard.
Debateable. ;) What I do find amusing is the idea that 90% + of the brewers on this forum (including pro brewers) who don’t take temp recommendations as gospel are likely using poor sanitation and/or yeast management. 
I typically pitch at hybrid rates (1 million cells / ml / degree Plato) for all my ales, so not super huge, but definitely not an under-pitch.
It’s not the act of not taking temp recommendations as gospel that I find objectionable. It’s about the tendency of home brewers to elevate pseudo-science to the status of actual science that I find objectionable. Without control cases, objective quality analysis, and a large sample size, any claimed process improvement is merely conjecture. Quite frankly, a brewer does not really know if his/her sanitation and yeast management practices are effective until samples are taken and plated. It can be an eye-opening event for many brewers.
Sure, there are limits to non-attemperated fermentation. One needs to be mindful of large temperature swings as well as excessive fermentation temperature, but the temperature ranges given by the yeast propagators are conservative most of the time. Most of the production ale strains that are in use today are isolates of strains that were selected via serial repitching long before the introduction of mechanical refrigeration and precise temperature control.
And that is my biggest pet peeve within the hobby. Yeast pitch rates, reusing slurry, hop utilization, the list goes on and on. Don’t even get me started on the whole “Is hot side aeration real or not” argument, I’m still confused.
This is, I understand why we’re in this mess: Nobody really has the time or resources to run enough controlled tests to obtain enough quantifiable data to get a definitive answer. But that’s fine, it’s a hobby, not a job, after all.
Ultimately at the homebrew level, however, it really does come down to trying things and keeping what works for you. Anecdotal, yes, but when I review things with my daughter (PhD candidate in microbiology), she often states that my conclusion is sound and then says why. She marvels at how accurate many homebrewer conclusions are, even though the scientific reason differs from what the homebrewer thinks is the reason for the conclusion. So, as long as the train gets to the station on time, it doesn’t always matter what track you are on!
Good discussion, fellows. My science is not strong enough to understand the specifics, but I think I get the general ideas. And for that I am grateful for the discussion.
Yep. First off, the yeast companies give several performance ranges - temp, attenuation, alcohol tolerance. They also give lists of styles that each strain could be used for, many of them a stretch… I don’t see the temp ranges as any more accurate as the rest of these recommendations. They are rough approximations to give new brewers reasonable performance. At some point a brewer’s personal experience and preferences come into play.
This kind of brings me to Mark’s “nuclear weapon” analogy. If you’re trying to take out New York City, you don’t need to pinpoint a dime in the middle of Central Park. Anywhere in the middle of Manhattan will get the job done. But if you have your target dialed in, you might as well shoot for it dead-on. That will certainly give you the most leeway in case something goes awry.
I’m a very new brewer, so I’m not sure how much my limited experience really counts; however, my first 9 batches were not temperature controlled and I did not use yeast starters. My ambient temp is 72 degrees, which I’ve noticed is significantly higher than recommended. The only excessive ester issue I had was with a tripel: hello banana! At first I thought it was the fermentation temp, but now I’m inclined to believe it had more to do with pitch rate. I keep expecting my beers to be overly estery because of what everyone says about fermentation temp, but my other beers have fermented very clean regardless of the yeast strain (including multiple Belgians and WLP002).
It seems to me that people rarely make one improvement at a time. Better temperature control probably happens right around the same time sanitation practices get better, people begin using yeast starters, generally gain experience, etc. Then at that point why would anyone want to take a step backwards to see or question what it was that actually made the difference?
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. People do what they do because it’s what they were taught by someone or advised on places like this.
For most people, fermentation temperatures are what they are. You put your beer in the basement and it could range from 65-70 depending on whether it’s winter or summer. If you want to ferment at 63, that’s kinda too bad.
Try a wet t-shirt and fan, it will take the temperature down by roughly 5 degrees F!
…But does it really matter?! Meh… probably not. Usually not. Sometimes yes.