Lu, I don't ever recall anyone here denying the existence of gyroscopic precession, simply that helicopters don't use gyroscopic precession, per se, as the primary control.
Similar to the model you mentioned, there is a child's "helicopter" toy that consists of a one-piece moulded plastic "rotor", with usually three or four fixed-pitch blades set at a positive pitch angle. The blades are moulded together with the hub and have a perimeter rim also moulded in, so the blades cannot move independently. Effectively, therefore, this little "helicopter" is a lightweight GYRO. The "Helicopter" is made to fly by using a launcher, a handle with a vertical spindle. The spindle can be rapidly rotated by pulling a string wound round it. These toys usually fly over the hedge into the next door neighbour's garden or onto the roof because they exhibit the qualities of a gyro and cannot be controlled....because a precessional force cannot be applied once the rotor leaves the launcher.
However, a helicopter as we know it has separate blades that can and do move independently from each other. The blades do exhibit rigidity but they ARE independent. NOT the same as that toy rotor/gyro wheel where the perimeter is joined.
Archimedes reputedly said "Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the world". However, there has to be a place to stand to apply a force! The force has to be large enough to produce the required motion at the required rate.
IF gyroscopic precession was to be used to control the path of the rotor as the pilot wished, where would the place to stand be and how long the lever? The rigidity of the blades due to the gyroscopic properties would strongly resist him. Would the pilot be able to overcome the huge rigidity of the system? Come to think of it though, there would be no need to use cyclic pitch changes, just a push / pull rod directly connected to the underside of the blade hub for the pilot to heave on... Hate to think how long the cyclic "lever" would have to be..
Instead, the blades have a pitch change sleeve and a pitch angle control horn connected to the pilot's controls. Now, a relatively small force can be used to alter the pitch angle, via the cyclic. This causes a change in the angle of attack of the blades, which fly to a new position. The aerodynamic forces overcoming their rigidity / inertia, call it what you will. They cannot do this immediately, so the blades follow a path similar to that taken had they been gyroscopically precessed.
Kaman's servo-tab rotor control system illustrates the point quite well. Where is the gyrocopic precession there? The blades are quite clearly flown to their new positions.
So, in UK, Oz and in quite a few other places the blades are flown to the desired position, not gyroscopically precessed. That is where your opinion and that of most others here seems to differ.