As a fellow (and somewhat informed) post quantum enthusiast, I would take that debunk with a carton of salt. A lot of it comes down to "we don't trust the gubmint!"

One of the objections, for example, is "unless you're inside NIST... blah blah blah."

I live in Boulder Colorado. I've been inside NIST and I have friends who work there. They're not NSA spooks, they're science and math nerds (some with PHDs). YES the NSA sticks it's fingers in stuff (I've heard friends complain about this), but MOST of that has to do with funding and priorities (as it impacts the researchers there). They're just science and math nerds who happen to have government jobs.

One thing about the NSA is YES they want to break crypto and spy on people, but they ALSO want to create safe crypto (so they can use it without worrying China and Russia are going to find their little back doors and backdoor THEM).

On the flip side, Daniel Berstein is an interesting guy who's done cool stuff to support free software and opensource as far back as the 90s. He's probably right that NIST needs to be more transparent in setting their standards and in the math that they use and as things progress him and others advocating for transparency should absolutely keep pushing. But is that a reason for the internet to freak out an say "Don't play with Kyber, the NSA P0w3ned it!!11!!!" Absolutely not! We should be playing with Kyber (I'm using it in two different projects right now), so that we can learn and understand how to implement it (and other, future post quantum algorithms). I'm assuming Kyber is NOT going to be the be all and end all of post quantum. We're still at very early stages here.