I understood what you were trying to say, and agree with the spirit of it, from the perspective of serious landscape and studio photography. Of course we need talent and vision to take great photographs. The philosophy can also be extended to other genres that are practiced today.
But things are much different today for almost all of us. Our digital gear gives us big advantages regardless of skill level or knowledge of photography. Photography is fun! Most of the general populace out there today is no more educated in photography than they were a generation ago... but pictures are much better because of better gear.
So - point taken, for the best images we need talent, knowledge and hard work. But many of us don't need to achieve such artistic excellence. We have fun and get the great shots we want.
The original issue was whether the gear we have now is already sufficient. Time will tell, but most likely there will be further improvements that will help us take better pictures. I've already mentioned the weight issue for me. Another thing I would like is bird eye focus. It would be marvelous for us birders!! I bet it will be here within 5 years.
I agree with your points except about the pictures being much better. For the most part we have technically better photographs of stuff that wasn't interesting to look at generations of cameras ago. I understand your earlier point about Ansel trying to shoot BIF with his camera. We all need the right tool for the job but in most cases it is overkill. I'm going to repeat myself from an earlier post today in saying that we all have more technology than talent. I've been on these forums probably as long as you and I've seen some good photography but I have yet to stumble upon true iconoclast. You know. One of 'those' guys. An Adams, a Salgado, a Cappa, etc. I don't claim Alex Webb as a friend but he is a friend of a friend and I've met him on several occasions. He doesn't care about noise, dynamic range, charts, graphs, MFA, camera comparisons and neither does anyone in his circle. I guarantee you that he usually uses cameras that are vastly inferior to your 7D2 but I think we would all agree that he does pretty well with them. There are also many notable professionals that use bodies much older than your 7D2 and there is no shortage of pros selling prints and making a good living giving workshops with nothing more than an iPhone. It says an awful lot.
The camera vs camera debate is old and tired. The debate is one fuelled by pride, insecurity, a need to justify excessive consumerism and a good bid of advertising. It needs to be put away. It is nothing but a disruptive, distracting grind. If the tech of it all is what drives someone and that's what they like in the hobby then there's no problem with buying whatever they want but if anyone thinks a camera upgrade is going to make them a better photographer at this point they're on the wrong track. People wax poetic about how great their new purchases are and proceed post images with it that are exactly the same as their previous gear. Purchase will never replace practice if the goal is to improve. I'm not a great photographer but I assure you that time has done more for my photography than anything I've ever bought.