When they call it "The Journal of Special Physics Topics" and publish and blog/journalists on popular websites make the statement 'physicists state' this isn't a fun little thought experiment. Unless this is The Onion.

A thought experiment would entail addressing a concept, some alternatives, having proper citations, and being more than a 2 page ramble of someone applying a basic data transmission rate formula.

The only thing they cite in that are formulas, they don't even cite their factually incorrect statements about biology. To make it worse, this article is part of their DEGREE. They are being assessed on this. This is supposed to be scientific[1].

This is infuriating, this is what discredits young scientists everywhere. Obvious crap being published by undergraduate journals and those Intel Science Competition fakes that take the credit for what graduate students have slaved on for years and claim they did it in a 2 month summer. They rile the media about how some 16 year old kid cured cancer and make the public upset about how experienced researchers, HHMI fellows, and Nobel laureates with tens of millions in funding couldn't do what this miraculous 16 year old kid did in 2 months.

[1] https://physics.le.ac.uk/journals/index.php/pst/about/editor...

While I don't have personal experience in this area (yet), everything here seems to be symptomatic of the issues within the structure of academia itself, and the students could very well just be victims of the machine. If so, bashing their misguided efforts like this doesn't seem like it would be constructive for anybody.

Being passionate about a subject is all well and good, but it isn't always the best state for communication/cooperation/problem-solving, which seems to be ultimately what you want here.