The study analyzed two separate phenomena - changes in engagement for Musk's posts AND changes in engagement for Republican content - occurring simultaneously. When taken together, these patterns strongly suggest algorithmic changes, not just organic user behavior from the assassination attempt.
Saying "you can't do that for the reasons I mentioned" is just wrong. Studies absolutely can point toward likely explanations without 100% certainty - that's literally how science progresses. The researchers used appropriate cautious language because they understand scientific rigor, not because their analysis is "crap."
Your argument that "if circumstances don't allow for a proper study, you don't make it" would eliminate most scientific advancement. Should we have abandoned Alzheimer's research because perfect data wasn't available? Obviously not.
What's truly absurd here is your selective skepticism. You demand impossibly high standards of proof for findings you dislike while accepting "common sense" explanations that align with your preconceptions.
Before dismissing research as "garbage" that "causes division," maybe consider whether your reaction is based on methodological concerns or simply that the evidence contradicts your preferred narrative about Musk. Your eagerness to defend him while offering nothing but personal opinion suggests it's the latter.