They don't actually want a hydrogen vehicle, they just don't want an EV and use "hydrogen is coming Soon(tm)" as justification for it.
But it's not worth it, since you are just carrying a big tank of water for no reason. It is a smarter solution that a battery which does carry everything at all times.
Most of what you say is not that different than what people said about batteries. Let's not forget that li-ion batteries are really hard to make and have their own major challenges, and for a long while seemed like a terrible idea. The story is basically repeating with anti-hydrogen arguments.
This includes the dumbest of them all: that it is just a conspiracy by oil companies. Last I checked, there is no carbon in hydrogen, and "novel liquid fuels" will imply adding carbon to it. So either it is not a conspiracy by the oil companies, or the oil companies were right all along.
Hydrogen is not burned in a fuel cell. It works the same way as lithium does in an li-ion battery. However, you can use hydrogen in a combustion engine, also as a compound for energy storage. Also, "fuel storage and refueling" is a huge advantage because you don't need to worry about slow recharging. This is often seen as an advantage.
You might rather refer to a color-coded periodic table which shows which elements are gases and which are solids at room temperature. That's a much more relevant concern than whatever you're trying to say.
The fact you can charge you EV at home (from your own solar panels if you have then) is a massive added bonus that's going to be hard to convince people away from once its established.
Thinking about what comes after battery cars (assuming there's a Lithium shortage) - I'd be very surprised if Hydrogen can scale up; I think it's much more likely we move to other battery tech, or perhaps novel liquid fuels. Hydrogen was always a greenwashing ruse by petrolchem companies.