Super slow and static are different neuro-muscular functions. Doing static holds is a stepping stone. Once the ability to do a push up is developed the trainee should focus on doing push ups as fast as possible. Then as many as possible as fast as possible.

Hmm, I've actually heard that most exercises should be quick on the positive side, slower on the negative. That is, lift 1 second up, 3-4 seconds down.

Doesn't the "as many as possible, as fast as possible" stance mirror your current EDT training, though? It seems like... what's the term... "confirmation bias"?

interesting post.  i disagree with the final part.  once you can do push ups you should start doing something more strenuous.

Once again, no doubt fueled on your outlandish ego, you missed the point.

my friend who did super slow had so little endurance he couldn't have a job because it was an ordeal for him to walk to the bus station.  instead he spent most of his day laying in bed.  he was in his 20s and he was NOT obese.

Terrible example. You're friend was not laying in bed all day because he was training slowly. Either your friend had some underlying medical condition or just a lazy bastard.. People like this are the reason why healthcare costs are so high.  If he can't get a job because he is unable to walk to the bus he is of no use to this planet. If you can't contribute to society you shouldn't be aided in your pitiful existence. I say let people like this die or do something for themselves. Survival of the fittest.

I have used the superslow protocol for periods up to three months with weights and without, dating back to 1995.  I was a big fan of Ellington Darden, and if you are unfamiliar with his credentials, you might want to look into it.  I also use static holds as in the 1 minute pushup, and with pullups mix it up between the static holds at set points along the move and other times continuous slow-mo movement.  I guarantee you neither of them have made me "slower".  If anything during those times when I've used superslow and/or isometrics (extended holds) I've felt stronger than ever.  It is a very unconventional type of training and hard as hell.  It literally takes all the "fun" out of a lift and injects a lot of pain and strain.  The whole "train slow, be slow" argument, I don't see the relevance unless you are training for a very specific event.  If you are training for strength and/or hypertrophy, why would you NOT want to at least experiment with a method that reduces momentum to zero and recruits every fiber in your muscle.  I have experience with high volume pushups (and lifting) done as fast as possible.  These left me drained and weak perpetually.  My superslow approach is the most painful few minutes of my day, but I feel great when it is over. Everything that works wasn't invented in the last five minutes.

Once the ability to do a push up is developed the trainee should focus on doing push ups as fast as possible. Then as many as possible as fast as possible.

That is the perfect recipe for overtraining and injury.  Superslow and static holds are not a progression toward being able to do a pushup, though they can be used for that.  They can also be used at a progression BEYOND a normal pushup.  A 1 minute pushup will wipe the floor with most people who can crank out 25 standard pushups.  Superslow eliminates the garbage most people use to cheat their way through an exercise, that's probably why most gym-rats badmouth it so much.

anybody who tells you how many seconds up or down you need to do is usually either an idiot, trying to fake intelligence or knowlege, or trying to sell you something.

First of all, you would be hard-pressed to find anyone NOT trying to sell you on something in the exercise world.  But I wouldn't call Arthur Jones or Ellington Darden Idiots, unless you spell "idiot" with PhD.

Training with pain in mind isn't very productive.

I don't train with pain in mind, it is simply a by-product of superslow, though once you are used to it, it isn't that bad.  Most people can't believe how excruciating superslow is until they try it, then they don't want any more of it so they never stick around long enough to see results.

Bodyweight training recruits the least amount of motor units of all types of training.

I'm sorry, have you ever done burpees with pullups?  Not sure how your statement makes sense. Which motor units are being missed? How can you possibly believe that using your own bodyweight is the most inferior way of training?  I think you have been led down the primrose path of the iron-worshipers.  You were born with everything you need to be the best you can be, you just have to use it right.  Do you know how many champion athletes used nothing but calisthenics and running, including many modern era boxers, arguably the most fit athletes of all.

Momentum and acceleration are the most efficient and safest way to train.

You can't be serious. What population are you talking about here?  It is NEITHER the most efficient or the safest.  Probably the exact opposite. Unless you are training for a specific athletic feat/lift, there is no advantage to doing an exercise as fast as possible, especially with a heavy weight.  The fact that you've been doing it for 20 years proves nothing, lots of people have wrong ideas for their entire lifetimes.  I don't state this to insult you or to detract from your dedication.  If a person wants to get good at Olympic lifts, by all means, they should be doing Olympic lifts.  That doesn't mean it is the only, or the best way to skin the cat. Will you be doing Olympic lifts at 80?  Let me know when you get there.  At 80 anyone can still do super-slow lifting and build strength.  That has been shown by Jones' work with the elderly.  There is no point going tit for tat over this, you have found your way you trust in, good luck in that pursuit.

I gave up weights after 20 years with no injuries.  One day my back was injured during some bent rows with a very moderate weight and it never recovered.  I used correct form and like I said, I had 20 years of no injury training.  After a year of bodyweight training, I looked better and felt healthier than I did at 25.  It has proven itself to me, in my case at least.  I incorporate things I did while lifting into my bodyweight training, such as superslow and isometrics to add diversity and intensity while reducing risk of injury to near-zero (so far). I have no knowledge or real interests in defending the person of Arthur Jones, I only know that superslow has been a time-saver for me and helped me maintain or even build muscle when I did use the protocol. There are certain bodyweight moves I do not do because they have more "risk" than reward in my opinion, likewise with many weighted exercises.

I have no doubts about that, weights are a completely viable option and have their place.  They are not crucial to being physically fit, they are only one tool in the box.
Likewise many champions have trained and continue to achieve the pinnacle of their sports without weights (like Hershel Walker for example, or Muay Thai fighters...not talking about Americanized mma, but the stuff where they kick banana trees for fun..just one weird example).  If I was an athlete who could get benefits for my sport from weights, I'd undoubtedly still use them as well.  Trust me, though I focus on compound bodyweight moves, I didn't throw away the dumbbells.