You guys are ignoring that PoW has to be paid for by diluting shareholders. If you would like to argue that they can be upheld by transaction fees, that is yet to be determined and depends on many unknown factors. I have only seen one (or maybe a few) coin reduce or eliminate block rewards with expedited emission rates, and in turn people stopped mining it and it was attacked soon after.

You guys are ignoring the fact that a huge amount of energy needs to be consumed to secure PoW cryptocurrencies.

You guys are ignoring that PoW tends towards centralization too.

Most of what you're saying is true, but there is a reason why developers don't run companies, economists aren't in advisory positions in hedge funds, historians don't run the government, etc... There is much more to the puzzle than technical analysis. There is network effect, volume/liquidity, distribution methods, emission rates, inflation/deflation, number of coins, number of coins eventually, transactions per second, transaction fees, quality and dedication of developers, services... (mobile wallets, exchanges, block explorers,  hot wallets, payment processors), ease of use, utility of the cryptocurrency (how many places and things can you purchase with it).

By reading your postings, if I blindly believed the words you spit out, would lead me to believe that Bitcoin is a bad investment. However, after considering all of the factors I can be sure that is not the case. Bitcoin is hugely flawed, and it is (and will likely be for some time) the king of cryptocurrencies. Only geeks care about most of the issues you guys write off entire cryptocurrencies for. Speculators don't have time to research every caveat of decentralized technology.