Kapnismologist said:
"While anaerobic/aerobic aging factors are a non-issue, interestingly enough, I do much the same with stronger, heavier-bodied cigars which have been aging for a good long while (I always age in original cellos if they are packed in such). That is, before smoking they come out of the cellos and are rested naked in the humidor for a good long while, and then even dry-boxed if need be. For some reason, I have always found this kind of "breathing time" (or "decanting") serves to open up flavors which are otherwise not there when going straight from a long-term, cloistered aging situation to the flame (the exception to this, I have found, are mild, floral numbers such as old Macanudos or lighter Cameroon wrapped Dominicans such as the Fuente Hemingways, which I find tend to lose certain notes and flavors if allowed to "breathe" too much prior to smoking).*
So, in short, with certain tobaccos of the sweet/heavy Virgina flake type like most of the Christmas Cheer issues I have found that long-term anaerobic aging does wonders, but only when followed by a period of short-term aerobic "decanting" to allow a final bit of magic to happen."
From this post I would say that you mostly still adhere to the aerobic/anaerobic aging creed, except for that troubling first sentence "anaerobic/aerobic aging factors are a non-issue." You still say long anerobic aging produces important aging effects which are only maximized by oxygen "decanting." Also of note is your dismissive tone in this statement, "Greg Pease waxing poetic on it on more than a number of occasions," speaking to, I suppose, as I find the statement unclear, his past theorizing about aerobic and anaerobic aging as stated in my last post.
I've been researching this and have only found the following three bits of information, but it is clear that Pease, like you, still differentiates between the two types of aging and finds importance in both.
It's important to remember that tobacco is organic; it consists of material that lived, but after curing it is dead. Ignorant of biology, I would say that means there is no longer cellular activity. But tobacco does deteriorate over time; those qualities that please us are called aging. Both of these oxygen dependent/independent phases produce effects that please the palate. We probably don't know which produces which effect and in what quantity, we just know that the changes produced by fermentation can markedly change a tobacco, and if we like them, we like aged tobacco. A clerk at the local liquor store told me he had drank 20 y/o single malt and that it was so changed that he preferred it fresh.
I don't know how to adjust my aging understanding as I can find no definitive exposition of this matter; but I shall continue looking.
The links to the information I did find follow:
http://pipesmagazine.com/blog/ask-g-l-pease/ask-g-l-pease-july-2012-volume-15/
http://pipesmagazine.com/blog/ask-g-l-pease/ask-g-l-pease-september-2012-volume-17/
http://pipesmagazine.com/blog/ask-g-l-pease/ask-g-l-pease-november-2012-volume-19/
A final thought. Cigars age, and from what I know they are always accessible to air, and thus, they do not age anaerobically. If both phases are important, how do they age?
The International Cigar Club, a heavily-weighted Cuban cigar forum, has the best discussion of aging that I've read. They discuss it in such depth that one's head swims! The threads in question elude me at the moment, but I'll post them as I find them.