A lot of people have already covered that in the comments … where you then argued with them and continued to try to defend your position.

In articles that contain one or two issues (i.e. where misinformation is the exception rather than the majority of the content) and that are not brazenly titled “Seatbelts Are Dumb. Just Use Your Arms.” I do that consistently.

If this article had been put forward as a question (e.g. “Are Seatbelts Dumb? Why Not Just Use Your Arms?”) it might have been less offensive than presuming to instruct others from a place of well-informed authority and experience. Or if it had treated the absolute (hours) and relative (points) options for estimation evenhandedly and discussed the pros and cons of each (e.g. “Seatbelts vs. Just Using Your Arms — Which Is the Better Option?” I probably wouldn’t have said a thing, just quietly muted you and gone on with my day.

Something you might want to look into is inquiry vs. advocacy.

But the article is not only wrong and a complete waste of everyone’s time; it’s a “hazard to navigation”. Less experienced people are going to read this and unquestioningly adopt and perpetuate the misinformed, flat earth idiocy that it confidently advocates.

In the end the responsibility for not publishing misinformation is on you.