How many times do we have to rediscover Kuhn's 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions' and write articles about ideas that were well understood 60 years ago?
Kuhn never argued about the misuse of data. He instead argued that the scientific understanding of the data lead to models that became increasingly complex. So much so, that scientists realized it was time to try a new way of understanding the underlying data. The new models were the "revolution".
Kuhn spent a great deal of time talking about the behavior of (usually older), establishment scientists clinging to outdated science, which is part of the problem here.
Because there will always be people who just happened to never come across those ideas.