Didn't say it wasn't of interest to some, just that it is a moot point for many who for whatever reason feel compelled to neuter…..usually earlier rather than later.
As far as research goes, the article linked by lvoss seems to indicate the same things. Statistics, of course, can be manipulated depending on what you want to prove. Short of doing a clinical trial where you can control for all the variables, any results will always be open to interpretation, i.e. was neutering the causal factor or was it simply a statistical relation because of some other common factor. I just grabbed what I could find quickly on Google to reference something that was out there, as I am far too busy right now with farm work to spend much time on research. However, I personally know of lots of supporting anecdotal evidence, from breeder friends and a couple of vets who have seen things in their practices. Yes, the plural of anecdote is not data, but anecdotal evidence can certainly provide some "smoke" to show where to look for the fire. 
But as far as the science is concerned, most of us just want to find something to support our own point of view......a natural human response. I'm reading an interesting book at the moment, "Thinking, Fast & Slow" , written by Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman, that amply demonstrates that the brain tells us to make quick, intuitive judgments with identifiable biases. Our more reflective processes, more often than not, line up to support these judgments. Scientists are not immune to this effect, either.
If people used scientific data to make nutritional choices, for example, most people would refrain from eating dairy products. But since we as a society are so influenced by advertising, we are programmed to make potentially unhealthy choices without questioning the wisdom of them. But that is a subject for another board.
