In my opinion, this is determined by the interests they represent. Many economists currently do not live independently. They need to depend on the government to survive. They need to help the government formulate various economic policies, financial policies, and monetary policies, so their starting point and interests must represent the government's will and interests. Therefore, in their world, the status of legal tender must be the most important and correct. On the contrary, they have forgotten the demands of the people and the interests of the people. Bitcoin stands on the side of the people, allowing the people to obtain their own asset freedom, and naturally stands on the opposite side of some economists.
This is my point of view, what do you think of this?
I think you just nailed it. We see the so called specialists because they appear on the media (our main source of information), so it's natural the media only invites specialists who corroborate with their point of view, that is the same point of view of governments, since there is a lot of public sponsorship at mainstream media channels or sponsorship from businessmen who have deals and are benefited by the governments.
All these people are linked in a chain that will defend the interests of each other, while the individuals stay outside this chain, only being abused by these entities who rule the world as we know. But I believe there are many economists who also think the opposite of what we see on the main channels, however they are never going to be highlighted anywhere.