Jorge Rodriguez (The good guy) is one of the academics that has collaborated with Elio Valladares in the problems of numerical coincidences and whose work and interaction showed Prof. Jonathan Taylor that he had not done the proper calculation about these coincidences. Today, he wrote this article in Tal Cual that I thought was worth translating.
McCoy, Taylor et al. By Jorge Rodriguez (El bueno)
Academic publications cite with precision who are the authors of the work, or who is responsible for certain conclusions on the basis of which the paper is written. Let’s say it is a formal way in which you respect copyright. It is not a whim, but a way of achieving recognition (or blame) on whomever it is due. If somebody makes an analysis of Venezuela and says that the number of hospital beds is the highest in the continent, or that our alphabetization level is one of the first of the world, he needs to indicate where the numbers are coming form, if it is something that was determined in a study or if it comes from the statistics Jesse (the Minister) sent.
More to the point, ever since the fraud was perpetrated on August 15th, Venezuelans have had Mrs. Jennifer McCoy, a Director from the Carter Center, telling them that all of our complaints were groundless.
When in the morning of August 17th. the numerical coincidences appeared- “The caps” remember that? Mrs. McCoy got rid of us in a few hours with the argument (argument?) that she had consulted the matter to “an independent statistical expert” from Stanford University. She kept us at bay for three more weeks, until at last she told us the name of the expert, a gringo version of the bearded Smartmatic kid. A young statistician, expert in medical applications, that had no clue as to what an electoral notebook was and thought voters were assigned to the lottomachines at the voting centers, according to their time of arrival. This was the “expert” Mr. Taylor of Stanford. Not even Dr. Smith of “Lost in space”. When this expert was confronted by a group of Venezuelan mathematicians, in less than a week he had to admit that his work had “severe errors” and that McCoy’s numbers were “seriously defective”. Later McCoy made him retract, but that is another story.
The other week, Mrs. McCoy came back in style, not against those that exposed Taylor, but against the work of Rigobon and Hausmann (Sumate). This time she resorts to the weakest of practices: that of anonymity. That statistical work-which I must let you know is a travesty, carried out by the Carter Center, has no author. Nobody you can address to point out an error, or to establish a serious dialogue with, only the “authority” of Ms. McCoy in statistics, or even worse, of one of her buffoons. Venezuela claims for seriousness Mrs. McCoy.