Facts are not political. Well, at least when we're talking about scientific facts.
Solar and wind is a non-starter simply because of the short life cycle and vast amount of fossil fuels required to build them. They're a great example of hypocritical technology accelerated and promoted only by those who benefit from their proliferation. Nuclear power and hydroelectric power is the only path forward in an all-electric world, but fossil fuels are the least impactful and longest-lasting resource to bridge that gap. And even then, that's assuming a viable form of energy storage technology is discovered in the future, as there are none out there today.
I used to be one that believed in the "green" movement, and that those naysayers about "green" tech were just zealots. Then I used logic, common sense, and an open mind to discover the truth. I guess it was an epiphany I had as a result of realizing how the movement was about power and politics as opposed to science brought to light to me by the fact that there were a couple of key and popular useful idiots in that movement that were 100% wrong in their predictions about what would happen in years that have since come and gone without incident. Cognitive dissonance is a real thing.
If you don't wish to do the same, that's your prerogative, and I respect your opinion. And if you show me that you believe your opinion outweighs established facts, I appreciate it; it's good to weed out the noise from the truth - just like all those who have been tricked into believing that CO2 is a bad thing, and that it's the #1 greenhouse gas in the atmosphere.