The discussion is not whether solar needs more space per energy produced, (and it does, nobody is disputing that), the discussion is if the area difference is relevant in the first place. And there have points been made why it is not, namely:

1. You can cover area that is not natural anyways: parking lots, rooftops, farmland that does not need strong direct sunlight

2. There is so much space in a country compared to that needed for solar that or just does not matter. Obviously you don't go and remove forests to put solar panels there

3. Plenty of space isn't arable in the first place, so what's the point of not putting solar there? Protecting the sensitive desert?

@GreyEyedGhost even gave you an actually ok argument against wind/solar, maybe try that one?