"Some on your list may lose the "d" less easily ... the back, but it is still plausible that some do."
"Now who's being condescending?"
What was condescending? Do you mean that I was stating things that you already know? If so, that would be condescending only if I knew that you knew them. I did not.
"I'm aware of all that. Of course."
If you were, it was not evident in your post and you have not addressed it in this one.
"But it is, of course, complete baloney, hooey, nonsense, and erroneous to claim that "handbag" with a "d" is a ... is /not/ indistinguishable from "hambag": it is probably sometimes indistinguishable from "hanbag", but I'm by no means sure of that."
He made no claim about your speech, he just said that if your are sounding the "d", it is a spelling pronunciation. I don't know why you refer to that as "mere" as the could just imply literacy.
You have not addressed my several points about our own speech not necessarily being evidence of general use or trends, and our perceptions of our own speech being tenuous evidence. If you "are aware of all that" why are you so certain about your own speech? (This is not a rhetorical question; there may very well be ways in which you know your own speech better than others know theirs. I don't know what they are, however.)
if you acknowledge that is probably sometimes indistinguishable from "hanbag" then consider the microscopic change that is necessary to go from there to "hambag" : the lips that close to form the "b" have only to do so a tiny bit sooner for the sound to be an "m." It is such a small difference that it seems entirely likely that many people do just that.
"Peter's post was over-hasty."
It may have been, but "baloney", etc. does make a case that it was. I might disagree with his inference that no one says the "d" in "handsome", but his description of how it probably often happens is a good one as far as I can tell.
(Is " 'baloney' , etc. " a compound subject requiring "do" and not "does".)