Always funny when people claim that scientific term apply to their software and then disregard any founded criticism in a non scientific way.
Now after reading the OPs responses and how defensive they are of some high quality constructive criticism, I don’t even want to go back and play more with the visualization.
Its frustrating because these issues are all fixable, and some of them are just bugs, but there's a mentality in this kind of science communication that ehh it doesn't matter because its just for the public. This does a real disservice to what people are trying to actually achieve in educating the public. Its also, unsurprisingly, a lot of hard work and validation to get from visualisation-grade, to physically accurate, and its a lot easier to not do that