I am simply referring to the result data from the study. I fail to see how that is disingenuous.
You say Scala and Haskell killed it in the study, and you are right, they were the third and second best language respectively with regards to low rates of bugs. Perhaps you also happened to notice (but failed to mention) what language did best of all: Clojure, a dynamically typed language.
I think the point is that all else being equal, static typing is better. But obviously all else is not very equal at all, and so in practice you can have a very well-designed dynamic language beating static ones on this metric.
You say Scala and Haskell killed it in the study, and you are right, they were the third and second best language respectively with regards to low rates of bugs. Perhaps you also happened to notice (but failed to mention) what language did best of all: Clojure, a dynamically typed language.