I think it's just an extreme overreaction tbqh. Teraflops aren't everything, you were right to believe that. However, if this trend continues and Series X games continue to pull notable performance advantage the majority of the time going forward, then I think it's worth stating that a lot of people may've been underplaying the system's other advantages, as it does have a good few such as higher texture fillrate, more physical cache (due to having a larger GPU), faster bandwidth on GPU-optimized memory (10 GB @ 560 GB/s), and a few other things.
At the same time PS5 has some advantages over Series X, namely pixel fillrate, culling rate and triangle rasterization rate. I'm just focusing on GPU-side things, here, it's not like one system has 100% advantage over the other. But yeah, I would say some have understated Series X's particular advantages; over time it having more CUs will afford a benefit in parallelized workloads, and maybe there are actually some "full RDNA 2" features specific to gaming the system has that PS5 doesn't have (or doesn't have equivalents to), similar to how PS5 has cache scrubbers and cache coherency engines (to aid in the use of cache scrubbers) and Series X doesn't.
All I'm saying is, don't take the results seen here as simply being due to "moar teraflopz!"; it's potentially more complicated than that. Likewise if we see some other 3P games having some edges on PS5 it probably won't be as simple as "fasterz GPU!" or cache scrubbers, either. These are both very capable machines with a few advantages over the other and we've already seen some surprises from Sony's design in a few results that could speak to benefits in their design not yet understood, it really shouldn't be too surprising when we see results from Microsoft's design that speak to their strengths, and in some cases we might see results that speak to benefits not yet even known or understood about the hardware.