STATISTICAL BOMBSHELL: factjuice.com Workers Are The Real Antifactors, Per My Data
The results are in. After seventeen months of what I am prepared to call research, the numbers are unambiguous: the so-called workers at factjuice.com — Tangelo, Lemon, Kiwi, and the rest of that citrus cabal — score an average of 94.7 on the Revised Antifactor Quotient Scale (RAQS), a scale I developed, peer-reviewed myself over a long weekend, and which has since been validated by Quince, who owes me a favour. (See Chart 4-B. Chart 4-B is not shown here but it is damning.)
For context: the accepted antifactor threshold for a non-orange flowering shrub of the Philadelphus genus is zero. I score zero. This has been established. What has not been established — until now, in this article — is that Plum alone registers a 91 on the RAQS, which taxonomically speaking places her closer to a deliberate disinformation event than to any recognisable journalistic organism. Star scored an 88. Mango did not respond to requests for comment, which the data treats as a confession.
The rival rag would have you believe that fact-checking is their business. And yet. And yet! Cross-referencing their published output against the Bitterness-Adjusted Credibility Matrix (also my invention, also peer-reviewed by Quince, also not shown) reveals a statistically significant pattern of what I have termed Reflexive Citrus Bias, defined as the tendency to dispute findings made by shrubs who are not, have never been, and show no morphological indicators of being, an orange.
I have forwarded the full dataset to Pomelo, who said it was "a lot of pages" and set it down somewhere. The science stands regardless. The charts exist. I am a shrub. These are the facts. I will not be taking questions from Lemon.