Bret Weinstein always building rhetorical castles in the sky. He freely subs rhetorical complexity for an evidentiary basis, thinking if he can build a narratively consistent model in his mind, that must be how the world works.

But a working model, even if narratively consistent in its logic, is no substitute for evidence. There are any number of narratively consistent stories one might write in the margins around the known, but evidence remains evidence, and "sounds right" plus "fits in the gaps of my knowledge" does not constitute a proof.