Can someone explain this logical inconsistency to me? What am I missing?

It's not that they know there's no actual danger - it's that you as the parent know, since all of their needs are supposed to have been met already (fed, changed, etc., as you mentioned). You're supposed to be meeting their needs when they cry during the day, proving to them repeatedly that it's a safe environment (and even creating positive, warm memories in their sleep space if necessary). However, at night, once they're of appropriate age and have the right amount of sleep pressure (meaning their schedule should be looking solid before starting any type of sleep training), you're essentially teaching them that 1) nighttime is for sleeping, when we all sleep in our own beds, and 2) you don't need soothing to fall asleep. It's a skill you can learn.

Hope that helps!

Basically, sleep training is a con. For thousands of years women responded to their babies needs. Then Two men came along and decided they apparently knew the bond between a mother and baby better than the own mother did. Then for hundreds of years since, marketing campaigns after marketing campaigns have come out to try and convince women that somehow there’s something wrong with their baby/toddler not sleeping through the night and needing extra comfort.
Hope that helps!

I’m an attachment specialist, please don’t sleep train it causes lifelong issues. There is so much evidence out there explaining why sleep training is detrimental to children’s development , the above comment is spot on!

Cos people want to make money from sleep training courses etc

Babies cry because they need something. Even if that something is a cuddle or to be near you. It's still a need.

Leaving them to cry in the night teaches them that nobody is coming to meet their needs so they stop crying to keep energy in case of attack not cos they have learnt it's safe.