The article cited disputes Gould's particular allegations about Morton's measurement bias.
The authors however did not dispute his "ideological" position which does have a sound scientific and historical grounding:
"In reevaluating Morton and Gould, we do not dispute that racist views were unfortunately common in 19th-century science [6] or that bias has inappropriately influenced research in some cases [16]. Furthermore, studies have demonstrated that modern human variation is generally continuous, rather than discrete or 'racial', and that most variation in modern humans is within, rather than between, populations [11],[17]."
Also:
"Morton indeed believed in the concept of race and assigned a plethora of different attributes to various groups, often in highly racist fashion."
Gould was wrong in his analysis of Morton's measurements and made his own errors but those were errors of methodology not ideology.
The authors however did not dispute his "ideological" position which does have a sound scientific and historical grounding:
"In reevaluating Morton and Gould, we do not dispute that racist views were unfortunately common in 19th-century science [6] or that bias has inappropriately influenced research in some cases [16]. Furthermore, studies have demonstrated that modern human variation is generally continuous, rather than discrete or 'racial', and that most variation in modern humans is within, rather than between, populations [11],[17]."
Also:
"Morton indeed believed in the concept of race and assigned a plethora of different attributes to various groups, often in highly racist fashion."
Gould was wrong in his analysis of Morton's measurements and made his own errors but those were errors of methodology not ideology.