I'm with you, Spag!
CTKook--see my post number 111 above. It just may be a matter of a picky technical distinction, and the conclusion that absorption is one of the most critical skills in bump skiing remains the same either way, so perhaps it doesn't really matter at all. But just as cars with better shock absorbers can both go faster on bumpy roads and remain in control at higher speeds, "absorption" on skis is critical FOR speed control, but it does not, itself, slow you down.
It's a subtle distinction that may be irrelevent for athletes who are just interested in performing, but it's a critical distinction for instructors and coaches whose job it is to teach and guide those athletes, and to understand the true cause-effect relationships of their movements.
But: saying that absorption can't suck up speed is basically the flipside to the arguments that you can't pump terrain features (including bumps) for speed, or that you can't accelerate out of a turn. People who say you can't do these things often do resort to saying they violate the laws of physics as Spag has done here re: absorption, with your concurrence. Why they believe that, I'm not sure; we all grew up with the ability to either pump higher in a swing or slow the swing back down without touching our feet to the ground.
On a related note, it might be helpful to check out a bike pumptrack if you haven't already, to see pumping & absorption in pretty much undiluted form (ie no pedaling to keep the bike going, just pumping; but you can reverse the pump & stop the bike very quickly). Different friction and edging issues but same general principle.
Anwya, I guess the horse is pretty well dead. Later.