Thus explains it.

[Boris Norris]

This is a long read but well worth it.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2103619118

 

[mark francis]

This is a long read but well worth it.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2103619118

Biased peer reviewed reports are flawed in that they do not deal with all the evidence and fail to refute facts that point to voting fraud.

 

[Boris Norris]

Biased peer reviewed reports are flawed in that they do not deal with all the evidence and fail to refute facts that point to voting fraud.

Biased peer reviewed reports are flawed in that they do not deal with all the evidence and fail to refute facts that point to voting fraud.

It was not biased. You obviously didn't read it. It's pure facts

 

[mark francis]

It was not biased. You obviously didn't read it. It's pure facts

No, the report failed to adequately explain these facts, and thus failed to disprove them:

https://wentworthreport.com/2020/11...te-counts-and-their-effects-on-election-2020/ 11-25-20

High Quality Statisical Analysis: Anomalies in Vote Counts and Their Effects on Election 2020.

This report studies 8,954 individual updates to the vote totals in all 50 states and finds that four individual updates — two of which were widely noticed on the internet, including by the President — are profoundly anomalous; they deviate from a pattern which is otherwise found in the vast majority of the remaining 8,950 vote updates…

Nearly every vote update, across states of all sizes and political leanings follow [the same] statistical pattern. A very small number, however, are especially aberrant. Of the seven vote updates which follow the pattern the least, four individual vote updates — two in Michigan, one in Wisconsin, and one in Georgia — were particularly anomalous and influential with respect to this property and all occurred within the same five hour window.

The four vote updates in question are:

1. An update in Michigan listed as of 6:31AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 141,258 votes for Joe Biden and 5,968 votes for Donald Trump
2. An update in Wisconsin listed as 3:42AM Central Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 143,379 votes for Joe Biden and 25,163 votes for Donald Trump
3. A vote update in Georgia listed at 1:34AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 136,155 votes for Joe Biden and 29,115 votes for Donald Trump
4. An update in Michigan listed as of 3:50AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 54,497 votes for Joe Biden and 4,718 votes for Donald Trump

This report predicts what these vote updates would have looked like, had they followed the same pattern as the vast majority of the 8,950 others. We find that the extents of the respective anomalies here are more than the margin of victory in all three states — Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia — which collectively represent forty-two electoral votes. …

In other words, these four vote updates alone won the vote count as it currently stands for Biden.

 

[Boris Norris]

No, the report failed to adequately explain these facts, and thus failed to disprove them:

https://wentworthreport.com/2020/11...te-counts-and-their-effects-on-election-2020/ 11-25-20

High Quality Statisical Analysis: Anomalies in Vote Counts and Their Effects on Election 2020.

This report studies 8,954 individual updates to the vote totals in all 50 states and finds that four individual updates — two of which were widely noticed on the internet, including by the President — are profoundly anomalous; they deviate from a pattern which is otherwise found in the vast majority of the remaining 8,950 vote updates…

Nearly every vote update, across states of all sizes and political leanings follow [the same] statistical pattern. A very small number, however, are especially aberrant. Of the seven vote updates which follow the pattern the least, four individual vote updates — two in Michigan, one in Wisconsin, and one in Georgia — were particularly anomalous and influential with respect to this property and all occurred within the same five hour window.

The four vote updates in question are:

1. An update in Michigan listed as of 6:31AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 141,258 votes for Joe Biden and 5,968 votes for Donald Trump
2. An update in Wisconsin listed as 3:42AM Central Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 143,379 votes for Joe Biden and 25,163 votes for Donald Trump
3. A vote update in Georgia listed at 1:34AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 136,155 votes for Joe Biden and 29,115 votes for Donald Trump
4. An update in Michigan listed as of 3:50AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 54,497 votes for Joe Biden and 4,718 votes for Donald Trump

This report predicts what these vote updates would have looked like, had they followed the same pattern as the vast majority of the 8,950 others. We find that the extents of the respective anomalies here are more than the margin of victory in all three states — Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia — which collectively represent forty-two electoral votes. …

In other words, these four vote updates alone won the vote count as it currently stands for Biden.

But still no proof.
Do you really those fictitious numbers were never checked by electoral officials? Yes you do but you have no proof.