It might be hard for you to stomach this refutation, because I only refuted one, but try this. Go to the site and try to see if you can find a place where the s

It might be hard for you to stomach this refutation, because I only refuted one, but try this. Go to the site and try to see if you can find a place where the site says "Elon said use X to buy Y" when in fact the quoted text means "after Y would gain X". This exists, but in finding it for yourself you'll learn more about the validity of your information source than I could ever hope to teach you. Afterward, think on the emotional connotation of the restatement. Ask yourself questions like why they chose to restate things so as to produce a falsehood. Then ask yourself about Elon's text in that arrangement. There are lessons about good communication within it and it directly corresponds with mathematics. Why does the information source choose to turn something which has deep mathematical truth justifying it were the claims to be true with something which is obviously non-casual? It isn't just wrong. It is obviously wrong. Everyone knows cause and effect. They do it anyway. They get it wrong, despite it being obviously wrong. Why? The answer of course is because doing so works. They hooked you, didn't they? Or at least, it seems to work. Truly, it doesn't, and the fact that it doesn't is probably best explained by someone other than me: read Plato. In particular read the dialogue in which the professor of rhetoric and Colt talk with Socartese about what it is that rhetoric is. He wrote about sites like the one you are using thousands of years ago.