I didn't mention there was any proof. Nothing about my post was factually proven or backed up, so I didn't think anyone would take it more seriously than anything else on the internet.
Things absorbed thro the skin don't just sit there
No, they don't. But the idea is that the cream doesn't
fully absorb. Over time these small amounts accumulate.
I don't believe there are such things as 'closed pores'. Thats an oxymoron isn't it? You have pores all over your body including around your eyes, that's why some people get pimples and milia there.
I don't know what there is to 'believe' about it. It's just a description of how pores work. And it is not an oxymoron. Closed pores does not mean no pores.
Also, as a long-time sufferer of acne, I have never seen myself or anyone else with a pimple on the eye area.

Maybe you're confusing pimples with styes. There could be some freak out there gets pimples on their eyes, but it's not the norm.
Anyway, I have some quotes. From the book
Vogue Make-Up by Juliet Cohen.
The skin around the eyes does not contain open pores. It has very little adipose tissue, and should therefore be protected. - Eve Lom, Skincare expert
I would have liked to have found the exact article I read on over-applying eye-cream, but this is something similar.
The area round the eyes is the first to show fine lines and wrinkles, so the temptation to overdo eye cream is enormous. But less is more when it comes to eye care. One Harley Street surgeon insists that most of his patients who have come to him wanting blepharoplasty (eye-job) operations have created their under-eye bags by using so much eye gel that it has not been fully absorbed. Rather than risk accumulating eye gel in your sockets, stick with a light cream product and use it sparingly, just dotted around the orbital bone.
I don't care if it's true or not. There are other reasons not to over-do eye cream.