No, it wasn't. Misrepresenting the conclusions of a study doesn't invalidate the study. The study conclusions still need to be challenged which your source doesn't actually do.
Nope. Again, the Forbes article made claims based on individual states that had limited survey coverage, the Morgan Stanley survey drew conclusions from the aggregated data. Whereas the Forbes article claimed state by state increases, the Morgan Stanley study made nationwide claims based on all the data.
I have a feeling you understand all of this but are just playing stupid because it better serves the point you are trying to make.
Read the actual study. (PDF)
Nowhere does it say that insurance went up 90%. The study states that nationwide the average jump was 11% in the individual market and 12% in the small group market, based on surveys of major providers. This is a drastic increase is growth rate over the last 3 years.
For instance, here is the nationwide rate increase for the individual market in the last 3 years (1 BPS= 1/100th of 1%):
View attachment 67170038
The jump corresponds with the beginning of open enrollment in ACA.
The same trend shows in the small group plans:
View attachment 67170039
All you have provided is evidence that Forbes used the study wrong. The Growth Rate of small group insurance increased by 97% over 4Q 2013, which itself was a 218% growth rate increase over 3Q 2013 (the last quarter before open enrollment).
The step increase into open enrollment was even more severe in the individual market with a 424% jump in growth rate from 3Q2013 to 4Q2013.