Do you mean "the worst"? There are plenty languages that are worse, and that are still in use. It's not great, but it's also not as terrible as you're making it seem.
> Absolute anything else would be better than it.
Okay, what does that have to do with static typing? Or are you saying that Typescript is better than Javascript? If static typing can make such "the worse" language better, why can't it improve other languages as well?
> Static typing in Python is a complete disaster when it's used on real commerical projects. I've seen the code thank you very much.
You make it seem like the alternative, not having static typing, is in any way better. No, it's definitely not - having e.g. your IDE know the types of values to help you in refactoring is extremely valuable, as is having static type checkers tell you about issues before running your code.
You either have unknown type problems because you're missing test cases, or you're re-building a static type system in your test suites. There is no way around verifying your assumptions about types if you want to build stable software.