Any evidence to support that claim? NASA employees raised concerns about the severity of the damage, which shows the contents of the slide were effectively communicated to NASA engineers, but that leaders ignored them. Thus the slide was not a contributor.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2271525/It-better-d...

Pretty bad title for a blog post that talks about misleading powerpoint presentations. Some readers might make conclusions from the title alone, instead of reading the whole text below.

Yep; this slide was worse than useless in that to the given audience it could instead read as an endorsement that launching is fine.

Please read the article so you don't come across as ill informed. This was not a launch/no launch decision.

This wasn't about a launch decision. An audience of engineers would not view this slide as an endorsement.