You collect data and there will be a margin of error. Much of these "research" information we get is dodgy as because the sample groups are so small and they extrapolate result out.
Academic research financed by corporations who aim to make profit is also highly suspicious. Not a new thing eg how many "Academic research" papers indicated smoking was not a problem during the 70's?

The author of this piece has either never taken a statistics course or doesn't understand it. The reason there are terms for what was done is that they are accepted practices as long as they are disclosed in the patterns and practices portion of the papers. It is also clear that he doesn't understand simple calculus. You don't use a spreadsheet for a database problem.
I looked at his referenced samples and they were in obscure journals with limited circulation, if prestigious journals whose readers would be able to discern the bullshit from the legitimate research. Had he done his research he could have presented a much better article.
He was as bad if not worse than the people he was complaining about. At least the people he was complaining about showed their work and how they came to their conclusions and did not hide it in the text.

And she got slammed for it all...does that tell you Nothing?

I heard someone say the other day that the powers that be should pull a Tiananmen Square on these Comunist little punks. OH THE IRONY!! But I must say, it wouldn't hurt my feeling THAT much.