This is a fallacy. Just because renewables in most places are net positive on price today at ~5% market penetration, there's no guarantee that they will remain cheaper than fossil fuels once you start having to pay for grid-scale energy storage. We might well end up with a 30% renewables, 70% fossil fuels situation as the outcome of market forces alone. Furthermore, it's not the total cost of energy from e.g. solar vs. coal power that affects the decision to shut down prematurely a coal powerplant. It's only when the total cost of energy from solar becomes less than the marginal cost of coal power that market forces will shut down the coal powerplant. This means market forces alone will take a very long time to transition towards the future equilibrium.
How about Mother (fucking) Nature.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
* To be pedantic, it's not that you cannot criticize Nature: you can do it as much as you want, declare it to be invalid, legislate away its right, like those genius NC lawmakers who made sea level rise illegal. Mother Nature doesn't give a damn.
But you can't criticize the golden calf of global warming^H^H^H^Hclimate change right? What's the saying, show me who you're not allowed to criticize and I'll show you who holds power over you.