I'm in an exercise science course of study and I'll be the first to tell you it has certain failings in scientific rigor and can be very dogmatic. That being said, I believe there is value to a systematic course of instruction for whatever field you are in. I respect that one can acquire quite an impressive education without formal studies, but I don't believe Mentzer had it as far as the relevant sciences go. I think Mentzer used alot of psuedointellectual posturing and overly elaborate philosophical arguments to explain what is a simple thing (lifting, eating and growing) without having to delve into the underlying mechanisms in a scientific or rational way.
Now, I don't want to be too harsh on the old dead feller, as I think everyone should try first then examine, and if HD gives them results, keep at it 'till it doesn't. I just hate to see people treat HD or HIT or 10x3 or any training methodology like a silver bullet when one doesn't exist. Don't deify the gurus, this includes Mentzer, Arnold, even our esteemed contribs, respect their input, but explore for yourself.
I just wanted to try to temper some of the dogmatic awe I saw developing here, that seems so common among the HIT/HD Jedi.