I'm right about the facts, you're misinformed about what is wrong about the paper. They did 3 things in that paper. One of them they have called a coding error

I'm right about the facts, you're misinformed about what is wrong about the paper. They did 3 things in that paper. One of them they have called a coding error. Ok. Two of the 3 were intentional. They intentionally omitted date ranges for some countries. And they weighted countries differently. This they admit to. And they defend. Yet, nowhere in the manuscript does it say that in order to get these results you must apply weights to the data and you must leave out some inconvenient data points. I can make up any argument for anything that I feel like if I start to apply weights to the data designed to make my argument work. They failed the most basic of scientific ethical standards.