It is true. The common feature is, "Sounds like BS to me." The solid answer to them, as to the previous quantum, relativity, and even neutrino skeptics, now satisfied, is evidence, but that stuff has been raggedly thin lately.
This, at the same time that we hear, loudly, "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".
Thank you, just ordinary evidence will do. The more the better.
I don't think dark matter skeptics are especially enamored with MOND or supercausality; I think they are just rationally suspicious of a one-theory field that prefers to sweep contrary evidence under the rug, while parading the dirty laundry of challengers; and want to see things kept honest.
I have no dog in this fight, but I have seen more than enough echo chambers operating in what is supposed to be science.
Speaking of which: This might be the only useful result, now and forever, of all the $billions spent chasing Tokamak: a generation of physicists not afraid of plasma fluid dynamics. God knows there will never be even one solitary erg of competitive commercial energy production from it.
And, while I'm here: "magnetohydrodynamics" is an extremely limited sub-field of plasma fluid dynamics, involving just the trivial parts. Astrophysicists seem to hate the expression "plasma fluid dynamics", and say "MHD" whenever they feel like they can get away with it. I have interpreted it as shame that they cannot cope with the mathematics that doing real PFD involves anywhere outside of the wholly artificial circumstances where MHD maths work; but I am open to alternatives.