This is conspiratorial anti science rhetoric, any econ student will tell you isn’t the case.
When you say something preposterous in the first place, saying “it's not perfectly accurate” a bit later is never going to be enough.
- libertarianism derives from a fringe branch of economics (the Austrian school) which is an heterodoxy.
- but mainstream economics, the classical branch then the neoclassical synthesis, is nonetheless heavily ideological (markets being seen as inherently good, even though they are often imperfect in the real world). And when you have a clique going as far as making their own apocryphal “Nobel prize” in order to promote their views and establish scientific credibility to political leaders, calling it “propaganda” is not entirely unwarranted.