If the article is unreliable, then why believe it? Why do you let a writer dictate what's true and what's not, when he's not under the best circumstances? Now, come tomorrow or so and if he drank or did drugs and make a new interview saying the same things but repeating in such a contradicting way, again, I'm assuming you will still believe what he says regardless? After all, he's a god, the entity with no imperfections. Every now and then, he can freely change his mental state and redecorates his whole creation anytime he wants.

Smh.