Have you read any of it and actually understood it?

I read now 8 articles and all of them are really bad :-/

I really don't have the motivation to go through all of that Garbage...

One dude compares the Bitcoin energy consumption with aluminum while ignoring that aluminum is actually helpful to smelt while Bitcoin is not.

There is so much ignorance in all of them.

'But how much energy should a monetary system consume?

How you answer that likely depends on how you feel about Bitcoin'

Another one plays around with marginal costs and writes pearls like this: "We will never know for sure but, if we look at the sale prices at the time of mining, and assume that they were mined with minimal initial profit, it comes to less than $20 billion. That would mean we put into circulation coins worth $200 billion for a tenth of their price."

Or this one were he just doesn't care to discuss the obvious issue of dividing bitcoins forever: 'But for now, just work on the assumption that the supply of bitcoin is capped at 21 million. In contrast, no one knows the supply of dollars.'

He just accepts that bitcoins are capped. Totally ignoring also how the transition to Bitcoin would make everyone richer who invests in it first. He just doesn't talk about it. And he goes on and on how Bitcoin is fixed while it's not.

Another article doesn't even mention Bitcoin just inflation and deflation in some weird writing style

And this one even points out issues: "The mining process is arguably wasteful, and justifiably has environmentally conscious people concerned. " Or "For this reason I think that even Bitcoin’s coin allocation schedule is flawed"

Again my question to you: did you read and understood those links you shared?