I agree. But I disagree that intelligent scrutiny comes from outside the Bitcoin community very often. Most altcoiner or nocoiner criticisms are not original thoughts. The same FUD gets used year after year, cycle after cycle.

-quantum computing -energy use -blocks too small -too little tps

These "flaws that will certainly kill bitcoin" have been argued years ago, rebutted, pointed and counterpointed hundreds of times. Before SN was a thing, before Bitcoin Twitter was a thing, back when it was all on Bitcointalk forums.

Imo, its generally only Bitcoiners themselves that understand Bitcoin enough to think about it adversarially. Altcoiners look at the differences between their coin and Bitcoin and argue why their different design decision were the right one. This is not an effective way of actually detecting weaknesses in Bitcoin, since it isn't meant to. When big blockers are talking about how 7 tps isnt enough, its not to help Bitcoin, it is to justify the bags they hold, measured in (loss of) dollars, (wasted) time and (spent) energy.

They aren't trying to improve anything. They aren't looking for a resolution to any debate. They are arguing to justify the choices they made. When they are starting to doubt those choices, they will return to arguing, again and again.

Last month, a vulnerability in LND Lightning Nodes based on a piece of code from an obscure implentation of Bitcoin was exploited, taking down much of the Lightning Network.

Twice.

Was it the Government? Was it the bigblockers who NEED the Lightning Network not to work to justify the decisions they made sacrificing decentralization for a small gain in tps?

No.

It was a Bitcoiner who loves Bitcoin and did it to make it stronger. I'm glad he spent his energy attacking Bitcoin intelligently rather than spending his energy defending Bitcoin against the stupidity of dishonest altcoiners.