I do not consider "off chain" solutions or "second layer" solutions to be a way to scale the Bitcoin blockchain directly at all. The only way to significantly scale the Bitcoin blockchain directly and significantly is by increasing the blocksize.
Then we have nothing to talk about. Your limited and closed-minded view (not ad hominem, nor am I trying to be offensive) is not adaptable to changing and new technologies. You could have said so from the beginning. Again, I have demonstrated the unnecessary bloat that the block size will create. It doesn't matter when, but it will be if the adoption is there. You can't change this. You have a very view opinion on this and I could state that it is irrational. You would pick a very inefficient way of transacting instead of a very efficient way of transacting for what, bragging rights?
If the current 1Mb blocks are underutilised, is there any evidence that doubling them to 2Mb will make any difference at all?
There isn't.
Actions speak louder than words. Any sensible person is wondering why is core apparently endlessly delaying the increase.
So the majority of the community is not sensible anymore? Because Segwit. If there was no Segwit and the decision was a block size increase, the HF would not be rushed as in Classic. If you want 2 MB blocks at some time in the future, what are you waiting for? Make a proposal. You will know what they think of it once you publish the BIP.
What you don't understand is that LN gives the opportunity for two persons (or companies) to have an theoretically infinite amount of transactions between themselves and then settling on the block chain. Tell me why this is bad if the transactions on LN (a decentralized solution) are almost equally as secure, cheaper and faster (near instant transacting in a payment channel)?