Netizen’s open letter to GMA News: “You are irresponsible to publish this, and yes STUPID!”

A post lambasting GMA News for publishing the article about the more than 100 academicians and Data Scientists who opposed the V-shaped Contreras-Yap analysis has been making the rounds online.

Credits to GMA News



In a Facebook post shared 75 times as of Wednesday morning, Ma. Victoria V. Ferro castigated GMA News for publishing an article about the 100 Academicians and Statisticians who have said that “there was nothing irregular with the V-shaped graph that showed how the number of Senator Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s transmitted votes went down just as those of Camarines Sur Representative Leni Robredo went up less than 24 hours after the elections on May 9.”

In the open letter, the netizen who was trained to analyze the movement of stock prices and the likes, called GMA News “irresponsible and stupid.”

You may read the OPEN LETTER to GMA News below.

Dear GMA Network,

Why are you publishing stories that are COMPLETE GARBAGE? For one thing, you have not substantiated this story by listing the over 100 Academicians or Data Scientists who are discrediting the YAP-CONTRERAS analysis. What’s wrong with them? Are they a bunch of COWARDS? What are their names, pray tell? What are their QUALIFICATIONS? Dr. Contreras and David Yap are courageous enough to actually give their names. Please reveal the names of these 100 jokers? These supposed data scientists, if they even exist, must be REALLY STUPID. They must really be the HEIGHT of STUPID. Because even I who have a graduate business background know that when you plot points on a graph to show movement of stock prices, or gains and losses over time, or of percentage ROI over time, when we are counting discrete units that are dependent on human behavior, we do not see straight lines.

In the analysis of Contreras-Yap, we see not just 1 straight line but two shaped in an inverted V! Don’t you know that the SECOND BIGGEST FINANCIAL FRAUD in history perpetrated by Bernie Madoff was tipped off because of a straight line? Bernie Madoff got caught because he made the stupid mistake of publishing ROI reports with totally straight lines. This is an impossibility. Straight lines in this instance and in the very case that Contreras-Yap describes shows something in the count is FAKE or MADE UP or PROGRAMMED.

I dare these people to list their names and explain WHY is it that very strange inverted V pattern only occurs in the Marcos-Robredo pairing and not with any other pairing within the VP candidate roster. If not one of these people can explain it, then THEY ARE THE FRAUDS! BTW, how come they keep harping on this inverted V analysis only, when there are other anomalies that have been brought up such as the ridiculous number of UNDERVOTES, the very strange behavior of transmissions over time, and the statistically impossible numbers in Basilan, the ARMM, Region 8, etc…

Can these over 100 stupid cowards explain these all happening at the same time, and why the strange behavior occurred AFTER the hashcode was introduced? Sinong linoloko ninyo? IT DOESN’T TAKE A ROCKET SCIENTIST. You are irresponsible to publish this, and yes STUPID!

The original author edited the last portion of her post and replaced it with the following lines:

Moreover, I find it suspect that 100+ “data scientists” came to the same exact conclusion. Sounds like major GROUPTHINK which is antithetical to TRUE SCIENCE.



What are your thoughts on this?

Comments(58)

  1. May 25, 2016
    • May 25, 2016
    • May 26, 2016
    • June 3, 2016
  2. May 25, 2016
  3. May 25, 2016
    • May 25, 2016
    • May 25, 2016
  4. May 25, 2016
    • May 25, 2016
      • May 26, 2016
      • May 26, 2016
        • May 28, 2016
        • June 5, 2016
        • June 6, 2016
        • June 6, 2016
    • May 25, 2016
      • May 27, 2016
        • May 28, 2016
    • May 25, 2016
    • May 26, 2016
  5. May 25, 2016
    • May 25, 2016
      • May 26, 2016
  6. May 25, 2016
  7. May 25, 2016
    • May 25, 2016
    • May 25, 2016
  8. May 25, 2016
  9. May 25, 2016
  10. May 25, 2016
  11. May 25, 2016
  12. May 25, 2016
    • May 30, 2016
  13. May 25, 2016
  14. May 25, 2016
  15. May 25, 2016
    • June 5, 2016
  16. May 26, 2016
  17. May 26, 2016
  18. May 26, 2016
  19. May 26, 2016
  20. May 26, 2016
  21. May 26, 2016
  22. May 26, 2016
  23. May 26, 2016
    • June 4, 2016
    • June 5, 2016
  24. May 26, 2016
  25. May 26, 2016
  26. May 27, 2016
  27. May 28, 2016
    • June 5, 2016
  28. May 29, 2016
  29. June 3, 2016
    • June 4, 2016
  30. June 4, 2016
  31. June 6, 2016

Leave a Comment