• Free_Opinions
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    5 days ago

    After the fact? After what? After the thing you’re claiming didn’t happen?

    Do you see what you’re doing here? You’re using an article whose sole purpose is to debunk the claim you’re trying to make. You’re emotionally invested in this - you don’t like Elon, so you want this to be true. When someone points out that it’s not true, with evidence, you start making things up to avoid acknowledging you were wrong. This is cognitive dissonance. The reason you have this false belief to begin with is because Walter Isaacson wrote about it in his book. Now the exact same person has admitted that this didn’t happen yet you still keep harping on about it. You’re literally spreading misonformation.

    • treadful@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      The article doesn’t debunk anything. All it really says is it can’t definitively say either way. You just choose to focus on the PR response because it supports what you want.

      • Free_Opinions
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 days ago

        All it really says is it can’t definitively say either way.

        No it doesn’t. It clearly says there that the original claim made in the book, which is the same claim you’re making here, is false yet you keep spreading it.

        Your claim: he shut down Starlink to stop a Ukrainian assault

        Truth: the Ukrainians THOUGHT coverage was enabled all the way to Crimea, but it was not

        Elon didn’t disable anything. It was never enabled in the first place. Your claim is simply just false.

        • essteeyou@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          I understand that people don’t like Musk, I can’t stand him myself, but there are enough bad things that he really did, to not have to stick to false narratives.

          The downvoting of the objectively proven truth here is like reading something on Twitter, but in the opposite direction. It’s incredible to me that someone invoked Snopes and spouted the opposite of the findings of that Snopes article, and is being upvoted for it.