consider this charming missive from page 15:

"and we show how the binary opposition of literacy/illiteracy is insufficient for describing how orthodox visualizations can be used to promote unorthodox science.

Understanding how these groups skillfully manipulate data to undermine mainstream science requires us to adjust the theoretical assumptions in HCI research about how data can be leveraged in public discourse"

it's called "performing science." one does this by gathering data, checking it for accuracy, and then analyzing it to draw conclusions. that, literally IS orthodox science.

y'all should try it. you might learn something!

instead, they engage in this shabby false equivalence by declaring "specific institutional conclusions" as "orthodox science."

this is either breathtaking mendacity or a complete failure to understand how scientific method works.

it's fascinating how much one can learn about a person from that which they ascribe to others.

this is MIT quite literally arguing that they lost this round of "science debate" because we were better at making presentations and clever graphs.

they sidestep the entire issue of content, rigor, and scientific method. this is the issue framing of a marketing department, not a science lab.

what a shambolic black eye for an alleged institute of technology.

they have become a seminary.