It seems the articles purpose is less about what could best be described as dunking on what 10th graders are taught about molecular biology for simplicity’s sake, and more about discrediting Watson by reframing the past, and chipping away at his legacy because of… well, you know.
Hanging your name on things has always been a double-edged sword in any context, but science is actively held back by cults of personality. Your contributions might be foundational, but your legacy is harmful.
