I think you should look at the graphic. It's riddled with inaccuracies and nearly-unreadable spelling mistakes and mangled typography. I think that's plenty of a good reason to flag it.

I think it really abuses the assumption of good faith and the default to generous interpretation, because it forces you to divorce the author from their own published work in order to view them seriously. I suspect most of the comments here are generously ignoring the included graphic. But in the most generous view possible, the author is fine with publishing wildly inaccurate statements.

I think this makes HackerNews much worse, and posts like these should only be flagged.