WTF do you mean by this? The reason we leave our beers in primary for a month, is because they come out crystal clear.
I don't know why you think we do it, but it's because when you leave the beer alone, the yeast cake compresses and tightens and we get clear beer, without even the need for clarifying agents like moss, or even cold crashing.
If you choose to secondary don't bash the folks that are successful with long primary, making snide comments "if you don't want clear beer" or whatever. And vice versus. Whatever we choose we're not idiots, we wouldn't be doing whatever if it didn't work for us.
I don't like cloudy beer, I wouldn't be doing it if my beer wasn't crystal clear. I don't like to lose contests, I wouldn't be still doing it if I didn't win things, and didn't get great judging comments about my beers that I long primaried.
If these things didn't work we wouldn't be doing it, just like crystal pepsi....if something doesn't work then it's discarded.
5 years ago the idea of long primary was scandelous in the brewing community. It went against everyone's deep set fear of yeast and autolysis. AND those of us who thought maybe there was another way were pretty savagely attacked about their beliefs. Now enough people, including people like Palmer and Jamil, have said they were too hasty in their repeating of those old brewing chestnuts. And that long primaries won't lead to off flavors, and may be beneficial. Places like BYO and podcasts like basic brewing, have had intelligent dicussions and conduct at least rudimentary experiments. Some kit instructions and magazine recipes have reflected this shift. It's an accepted practice by many many brewers now. It's a choice.
The only way is to experience it for yourself. Like everything else there's different ways to do things, and they both work.
Regardless of whether you secondary or not, it's about not rushing your beer into bottles. If you rack to secondary for 6 weeks, or if you leave it in primary for 6 weeks, you're probably getting the same overall effect. (Though some of us think yeast contact improves the beer overall.)
Heck if your fermentation is complete in one week, yet you sit it in primary for another week and then secondary for 2 weeks or a month, you still are probably getting the same yeast contact/cleanup time, whether you rack it or not (we can only speculate.) If I do secondary to add fruit or something, I still leave it at least 2 weeks before moving it.
But we wouldn't be doing it for years now if it didn't work.
Although you present "facts" in a rude manner, you seem to know the basics about brewing yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae/Saccharomyces pastorianus) and autolysis. In addition, you are mostly correct when assuming that leaving beer in a fermentor for weeks won't cause off characteristics from autolysis.
In case there are new brewers who are interested in the topic and perhaps want a better understanding of autolysis (the degradation and solubilization of cellular components released by the degradation of the cell wall), I will provide a little more information without the attitude.
During autolysis, the release of large molecules (e.g., proteolytic enzymes) from yeast has a detrimental effect on several beer characteristics, including taste, mouthfeel, color, and foam quality. These effects are usually mediated indirectly through the destruction of proteins and polypeptides, with the concomitant release of peptides and amino acids.
The effects of yeast autolysis are not entirely negative.
Release of those small molecules (especially nucleotides) may impact positively on beer taste and mouthfeel in some circumstances. Scientific studies have already proven that added 3'- and 5'-deoxyribonucleotides have "enhanced" sparkling wines in those areas.
In addition, the food industry uses autolysates as flavor enhancers in many applications. Given its wide spread usage, you would imagine a lot is known about the subject, but the biochemical changes that occur during this process are not completely understood. Degradation of proteins has received the most study, but changes to other cell components such as nucleic acids have been examined to a lesser extent.
...now
So what does all that mean for the average home-brewer? Well, your probably familiar with glycogen (a carbohydrate) in yeast. Basically it's the main energy source for yeast and essential for the synthesis of Ergosterol (sterols in the yeast cell wall that allow it to uptake metabolites, they deplete rapidly during fermentation)
When yeast doesn't have an energy source to "feed" on (after fermentation), it begins to use those glycogen reserves. The rate of glycogen metabolism is increased in warm temperatures, during agitation, and the presence of trub (fat/protein/inactive yeast). If yeast relies on energy from glycogen for too long, it will start to degrade and autolysis occurs.
This can be a problem if your thinking about re-pitching a yeast after letting it sit in a primary for a month+
So should you rack to a secondary fermentor? I believe from the data presented to me, you should if your going to age it in a fermenter for over 5 weeks and less if your brewing a high-gravity beer. If your re-pitching yeast, I wouldn't even let it sit that long. Even a small amount of cells going through autolysis (<3%) may affect your beer's taste and characteristics.
If there's any other professionals in Food Sci/Microbiology that can add to my brief description, or have differing opinions on max primary fermenter times, I would like to hear your thoughts on the subject. In the future I plan on performing a lab study that measures the rate of autolysis in a "home-brew" fermenters by measuring yeast DNA/RNA mass changes over time. Any procedural suggestions would be welcomed.