No, YOU are getting confused.
No one is disputing that. What they are saying is that the google stats that you posted as 'evidence' are based on incorrect assumption that a search for 'min' only provides results for sites that are using min to mean minute.
min can also be an abbreviation of other words e.g. minimum AND the search for 'min' provides results for sites containing 'min' as part of another word like mini or miniscule or mince etc etc etc.