Yes, I'm sure you could hack together some bullshit questions to demonstrate whatever you want. Is there a specific reason that the reasonably straightforward methodology they did use is somehow flawed?
Neither is my bucket of 30 questions statistcally significant but it goes to say that I can disprove their hypothesis just by giving them my sample.
I think that the report is being disingenious and I don't understand for what reasons. it's funny that they say "misrepresent" when that's exactly what they are doing.