Explain where he's wrong?
do I have to do it againnnnnnnnnn?
Well, for one thing, it's not a Ponzi scheme. It doesn't meet the definition of it at all. You can go look it up yourself. Bitcoin is in no way a Ponzi scheme. So basically, whenever anyone calls it that, I know that they haven't really done any investigation and instead have relied on histrionic rants they've read elsewhere on the internet.
But beyond that, how is he wrong:
He uses the early adopter argument as something negative.
What he doesn't acknowledge or perhaps even understand is that early adopters are the ones that built the network. They invested valuable resources in it, such as hardware, skills, time, and electricity consumption. They did not get "free" bitcoins.
But not only that, why shouldn't early adopters benefit? Do people who bought Apple stock early get vilified because they took a risk on something they believed in?
I'll discuss more as this thread evolves.