WrongBot wasn't very clear in that particular comment, but he explained what he meant somewhat here

I was trying to point out that, regardless of whether Pinker has taken exaggerated positions, he has "deliberately misrepresented key evidence in support of a position." Is doing that well-reasoned?

Demonstrating in painstaking detail that he has done so is the entire point of the first third of the post. Did you not find that convincing?