The reason it matters is because if you use faulty evidence (or in this case, questionable evidence) to try and sway someone, it just makes you look untrustworthy as Elon claims everyone who criticizes him is, and risks entrenching them against you. If you’re making statements with complete certainty, you need to have near-unassailable evidence.
The idea that we should just go “well, we already knew he was a nazi supporter, no need to comment when he does an apparent nazi salute on the inauguration of the president he bought” is pretty silly
The point isn’t to ignore it. The point is be honest to the truth, including any uncertainty. Jumping to conclusions or acting like you’re certain when you’re not only serves to weaken your position. If you’re trying to prove Elon is a Nazi, you should point to all the statements in support of Nazi ideology and his complete refusal to condem it even when relevant, rather than something that could just be regular stupidity.
Ah, yes. Thank you for proving solar and wind are reliable. I’m sure the performance will be completely identical here in Canada where it’s been dim and overcast for the last two weeks and everything is coated in 6 inches of ice and 30 more of snow.
I’m obviously being facetious, but this is a really terrible headline. Renewables have an important place, but using best-case and saying that debunks the idea that they’re unreliable is ridiculous.
Edit: I’m not against renewables, even in colder climates. I’m just mocking the headline itself for its line of logic.