I don't see anything in that essay that supports any but a very broad interpretation of the phrase "misrepresented the data". I see a bunch of innuendo and odd

I don't see anything in that essay that supports any but a very broad interpretation of the phrase "misrepresented the data". I see a bunch of innuendo and odd stats like this one: > Of professors who say that they are religious, fully 19% of them can be classified as “traditionalists,” which would include evangelical Christians (which in Kristof’s NYT op-ed were presented as a maligned minority, not part of the solid 1-in-5 religious professors who are traditionalists found by the survey). One in five religious professors are traditionalists. So what?