A Conversation With A Chaos Agent: Ethical Skeptic
Sometimes you can't block everyone able to argue...
In my last article1, I showed that “Ethical Skeptic” had manually altered the U.S. 0-4-year-old deaths data - in one of those “data analytics” masterpieces he whips up in Microsoft Paint, which he wields like no one else.
The result? Instead of showing the actual normalized infant deaths / 1000 births rising, legitimate reason to investigate the alert, as shown in the article…
… or the longer trend 2000-2020, 0.3% event, as shown by Jikkyleaks2…
… he presented what looked like a full-blown, 20-sigma, “extinction-level event” in the raw death counts for this age group. For reference: the green line below is what he proudly showed the world - and the blue line is what he claimed to have calculated, though in reality he simply cooked the numbers.
This fraud - like many other chaos agents propped up by bot farms and paid hype squads that keep them credible among well-meaning activists - carried a surprising amount of credibility among safety advocates.
So, as expected - and since I’m getting some practice at confronting some of the scene’s prominent players - this article, along with the Twitter thread announcing it, stirred up some backlash.
But while he’d blocked me on X over a year ago, and that he spent several days posting behind block, attempting to contain the damage, I had an advantage: there was one place he couldn’t avoid me - a very visible group chat, full of high-profile accounts and sharp analysts. Being exposed for fraud there would hurt his credibility badly, and “blocking” wouldn’t save him.
What follows is the conversation - anonymized when others chimed in, but with their participation preserved for context. It is an exact account of our conversation, timestamps in Paris time.
I consider it’s in the public interest to know these “behind-the-scene” details, hence its publication. It won’t amuse everyone to read the tedious take-down of an arrogant fraudster - and if that’s you, apologies. But for others, it’s valuable documentation.
I started with my usual offer whenever I publicly call out someone’s integrity: prove me wrong, and I’ll apologize and walk away from the scene, definitively, in shame.
All he had to do was share the spreadsheet or the code he used to generate his chart. But he couldn’t - because that would have proven my point: he faked the data.
Instead, he accused me of “doxing” him, spouted gibberish, hid behind fake arrogance, quietly edited his article to make it look like a .PNG version of his spreadsheet had been there all along, and kept shifting his story several times.
Meanwhile, various analysts either confirmed my findings that he had doctored the data, or denied ever reproducing his results - despite his claims. It all played out across several threads on X, which are easy enough to track through the clickable previews.
It ends with his voluntary exit from the chat - once he had nothing left to hide.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 01:34
- you blocked me for no valid reason a while ago, but I’ve unblocked you so you can reply. https://x.com/canceledmouse/status/1970270111169986911I reverse-engineered your 0-4 deaths chart and exposed your fabrication here: https://openvaet.substack.com/p/us-data-census-flaws-alert-signals
I will publicly retract and apologize if you provide:
• Your exact data sources
• Your CDC WONDER export (so we can see the query details)
• Your spreadsheet or code showing the exact transformations you applied
Further, I’ll be happy to retire from the public debates, if you can demonstrate such a clear method to reproduce your analysis.
I hope you won’t argue “offended dignity” and run from such a beautiful opportunity to restore your reputation.
Until you do provide such documentation, tho, I’ll consider you - along with most people reading this chat - as a proven fraud - and I’ll keep saying so, loudly and publicly, because manipulating data to discredit real pharma safety concerns is worse than doing nothing at all.
Anonymous Participant 1 - 2025-09-23 02:20
You’re saying the epigenetic/generational inflection points are falsified?
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 02:21
In the case of his 0-4 deaths chart, yes, entirely as 2020 begins (while 2019 is reproducible - showing I made no math error).
The green line is his “excess deaths”. The blue line is reality. As births are going down and as he compares non-normalized figures, it’s basically impossible to get significant excess deaths (as you have less births)
I modeled the manipulations I observed. Which results in a near-perfect match. You can easily check my own excess death calculation - every source & script is on the Git.
Anonymous Participant 2 - 2025-09-23 05:55
I don’t know enough about statistics but I know Openvaet is very hard to prove wrong. Someone else will have to look at this that gets numbers
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 05:58
He is wrong on this
It is EASY to check. He is incompetent.
He also doxxed me, and has made his focus on me...
A serious concern.
Anonymous Participant 2 - 2025-09-23 06:11
I have not seen anything identifying you ES. If that’s out there floating around somewhere I am very sorry. It sucks.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 06:13
Openvaet has been sending my CV around telling all he can how I am a spy - and counter-intelligence, sent to mislead everyone.
I was a spy. In operations - the REAL DEAL.
Something is not right with Openvaet, and it gives me concern.
My first duty is to my family, and to protect them.
So I owe none of these raging fanatics my attention.
Anonymous Participant 1 - 2025-09-23 06:19
He did dox him. Thats uncool
That said, ES has two injured kids and that is his #1 priority.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 06:24
But you don’t target a specific person for harm and pursue them over a long period of time. That is the difference between a normal person, and someone off kilter.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:41
https://x.com/EthicalSkeptic/status/1970327368901284166
10 points for the reply behind block, buddy. Except that I asked a direct link to your sources, and your file. Who do you hope to gaslight here?
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:43
You do not need my database in order to assess this data. To contend that you do, or pretend with ‘R’, means you are not competent at this.
You lied to these people.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:43
Then, you’re also tragically misrepresenting that I “doxed you”. All I did was saying “holy cow” when someone brought me your spooky C.V. Then you mumbled something about your math reproducibility & blocked. Another blatant lie.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:44
and worse you targeted a person rather than focusing on the issue and asking questions.
I did not ‘mumble’ anything. I have an entire article outlining the approach, method and corroboration.
You keep implying it is just a stand alone chart. Another misrepresentation.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:45
Source.
Code.
Or show me someone who reproduced your 0-4 deaths trends transparently, please. I just showed you lied again, you pathetic fraud.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:46
You got embarrassed here.
https://x.com/EthicalSkeptic/status/1970350119238168602
Laugh all you want. I take this subject seriously. You are in a high school pissing contest.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:46
Yeah, I’m awfully embarrassed by your horizon of events mumbling. We won’t see a source or code & can end this painful self-humiliation exercise from you then 😂?
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:47
High school.
Immature.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:48
You got shown to be a complete fraud by a high-schooler, then. That’s sad, spooky. Show us the data resulting in a non-normalized 20 sigma increase in infant deaths from decreasing births, please.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:48
You crafted a fake baseline, that departed from a 25-year record, that was purposely buried in your ‘R-code’ to deceive.
and you used it, not for truth, but to continue to stalk me.
It is sick.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:49
I find you quite disgusting. Using infant deaths for propaganda purpose shows everything about you.
You also lied about your own children being injured, did I see in the chat? You’re daring to say “sick”..?
Would you accept a moderated debate? 3 independent, reputable judges ; the loser retires?
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:49
You are showing your dark colors.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:50
Keep telling yourself you’re doing good with your pathetic gas-lighting attempt, buddy. I provided every source & code. Tell me again where I altered the baseline please ; which script does that?
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:50
No, accusing me of lying about my children is malicious. That is gas-lighting.
I owe you nothing.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:51
A little DARVO session now.
Do you think you’re gas-lighting 2020 mutton here, dummy?
I proved you a liar twice in this short session ; why wouldn’t I suspect you to lie three times?
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:51
Just keep talking to yourself. I am done speaking with you.
You have proven nothing.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:51
We’re just starting, fraud.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:52
Just as I suspected. A stalker.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:52
If you think people can’t see that you’re blowing wind & crying victim to hide from your lies... Bad calculation.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:53
Darkness.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:54
Glad to meet you, Darkness. I’m not impressed.
Not just darkness, don’t be modest ; a good dose of stupidity, too. And cynicism, and massively inflated ego.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:55
You lost. You are angry. I get it.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:55
How do you regard normal folks, in your spooky universe, to be able to lie blatantly on infant deaths, hoping people will repeat your nonsense & get ruined in court or in peer review?
I’m so “angry”. Accept my offer of a moderated debate to show how much I’m the angry one, spooky.
If you really had half of a source & code to back your amateur analytics, you would have retired me twice already.
Where is this pathetic plot coming from buddy?
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 07:57
I am not your buddy. Stop speaking like a school child.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 07:59
*High school !*
*He doxed me !* (shown to be a lie)
*He is incompetent but I can’t show my “database” (🧙♂️) to show everyone how I get the opposite of reality !*
*You’re hurting my children !*
Have I summarized your argument?
I had just asked for a source & code to apologize & retract, but now I’m sure you’re a total fraud, after this little DARVO session.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 08:01
I showed my database, and methods.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 08:02
“My methods” ; buhahaha. That’s the problem with government employees, you guys have so low standards.
Where is the source & the code, clown?
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 08:04
The data is right here. It caught you defrauding everyone.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 08:05
Let me help you again. The green line is your nonsense hyped on mushrooms, with a bit of “folleague” mumbling & gas-lighting.
Your documentation is total crap but it’s okay, I worked it out ; cf. 2019 fitting.
That’s the blue line showing reality. How do you get the EXACT OPPOSITE of reality on your non-normalized analytics for highschooler, you statistical God, enlight us please?
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 08:06
You are caught.
You cannot spin your way out of this with R-code. You fabricated your baseline.
You fabricated your baseline.
and got caught.
And everyone knows it now.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 08:06
My God this is so pathetic and desperate 😂
How did I do that, show us the line in the code, not your pathetic made up plot.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 08:07
You are speaking like an exposed teenager. Same colloquialisms.
You got caught. Sorry.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 08:07
Let’s take a simpler exercise, as I’m starting to suspect you can’t even code, that would justify how your defense is so miserable 🤔
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 08:09
No, I just did this for real. That’s all.
I am not an student.
You are a student who got caught lying.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 08:09
No, if you were a student of mine you would be fired for irremediable incompetence, indeed.
https://github.com/OpenVaet/us_mortality/blob/main/compare_real_excess_with_tes_fakes.R
Where (which line) is the baseline altered please? Either you can show that my source is altered, or that I committed a data fraud (as I showed you did) in the script, or you really have nothing pal’.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 08:12
It is right there in your published chart.
You paltered the baseline, and did it in order to target a person no less - you could care less about infant mortality.
Don’t hide behind R. That is cowardice.
The data is visual.
You lied and got caught.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 08:14
DARVO & gas-lighting again. I had offered you to retract if you could show code & source. Your “private database” that none can reproduce isn’t an excuse here, we’re talking Wonder data according to your own sourcing.
Then after lying about infant deaths, you lied about doxing. Then you most likely lied about your injured children. You disgusting little fraud.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 08:15
All incorrect. You are a stalker.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 08:15
Why is everyone who can analyse data saying I’m right, fraud?
By the way, where do you think your pathetic attempt to gaslight @jikkyleaks (while replying behind block) is going? You know this mouse handles data better than me & will cut through your lies like butter?
Anonymous Participant 3 - 2025-09-23 08:21
If we may, we kindly ask that both parties interact without provocation and with the respect that researchers and scientists are expected to uphold. Let us engage in the most constructive manner possible, in good faith, while keeping in mind the larger fight at play
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 08:24
Indeed. Before this fraud accused me of doxing & refused to submit his sources and code, I had simply asked for that. Seems he can’t provide these so he’ll pretend he was doxed (which I also showed to be a lie).
Again, my code & datasets are public & reproducible - not to mention the various analysts who came forward. Why aren’t you pressuring him to satisfy this very basic need?
We need to call frauds exactly for what they are. He lied about infant deaths, purposefully. No math error can excuse such blatant fraud. I don’t really get what could be interpreted as offensive in requesting a dataset & code on a Git.
Anonymous Participant 3 - 2025-09-23 08:25
Let’s not allow this to descend into personal quarrels. The priority must remain transparency, accountability, and the preservation of integrity in how evidence is handled. Thank you for your kind attention to this important matter 🙏
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 08:27
He accused me of doxing. I showed he had lied. Don’t you think I’m founded to take it the wrong way?
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. I’m sorry for people it makes uncomfortable but given that this fraud is blocking everyone who can show him for what it is, and that I see him gas-lighting people here with his disgusting lies, it’s far better done in public.
Anonymous Participant 3 - 2025-09-23 08:28
We did invite both parties: If we may, we kindly ask that both parties interact without provocation and with the respect that researchers and scientists are expected to uphold. Let us engage in the most constructive manner possible, in good faith, while keeping in mind the larger fight at play 🙏
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 08:29
I agree. Can @EthicalSkeptic professionally show his Wonder data & the Excel spreadsheet he used to result in his plot, please?
Anonymous Participant 3 - 2025-09-23 08:30
That’s the spirit. Thank you deeply 🙏
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 08:31
I don’t doubt @EthicalSkeptic will satisfy your most based request and will provide that.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 09:23
But apparently I’m too optimistic & he decided to reach the same result trying to gaslight Jikky
He probably can’t show us the Wonder data or the spreadsheet he uses because he has a special security-clearance-only access.
He can’t show us anyone having reproduced his 0-4 deaths analysis and every data scientist who saw the thread validates my diagnose, but that’s coincidence 🤔
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 17:26
25 humor points for the gaslighter extraordinaire @EthicalSkeptic..
.. the spreadsheet retrospectively added, in PNG format 😂
Damn this is so bad. You don’t know that there is this thing called archives, and that I’ll only expose you more with your cheap tricks, low wattage fraud?
Anonymous Participant 1 - 2025-09-23 18:23
FWIW Openvaet said he didn’t doxx ES and ES said he did. I have no position regardless, but that was the reason he was blocked according to ES
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 18:24
Thanks for clarifying. As can be clarified for anyone scrolling up, I provided “when he blocked me”, and he was lying on that too.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 18:28
No, I blocked him for acting like he is now, from day 1. The doxxing came later.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 18:28
Nah, we were quite cordial in the beginning. Keep lying buddy.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 18:29
No, you started with the insults and lying and got blocked.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 18:30
Congrats on publishing your Excel PNG 😂
That’s how real data scientists do it.
Do you think nobody has eyes to read your version changing in a matter of hours in this chat?
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-23 18:31
I tolerated you for a while. Then you revealed your true nature.
The conversation is over. I am back to working.
and you will remain, blocked.
Openvaet - 2025-09-23 18:33
Clown. I’m traveling for now but I’ll expose you further in the evening, you’re doing the job alone.
You’re giving me great hope. If you’re the top tier of the nudge industry, you guys are really more desperate than I had evaluated. Miserable combination of blatant lies and cheap DARVO as sole defensive line.
Openvaet - 2025-09-24 02:24
Progress, now we know @EthicalSkeptic hasn’t faked his raw deaths but only his excess death. Find the error in the script reproducing your math & showing your fraud, or show your spreadsheet, please.
Anonymous Participant 4, sending the link of a public post - 2025-09-24 07:53
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-24 14:58
Openvaet - 2025-09-24 15:11
Oh my god that’s so verbose, proven fraud. In case you missed the last days, you’re standing demonstrated to have manually faked data. People are expecting you to produce a spreadsheet allowing to reproduce your chart.
Obviously you don’t intend to do that ; rather you intend to lie, accuse people of various things they haven’t done, and agitate your massive Dunning Kruger.
Nobody is impressed.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-24 15:12
I have the worksheet in my article, and it shows precisely why Jikki is wrong here.
The data must be allowed to speak, and be handled by a professional who knows how to do this.
Openvaet - 2025-09-24 15:13
Can you show us the exact link to a spreadsheet which isn’t a PNG, fraud? You edited your article so many times without note that it’s hard to follow.
Don’t type “professional” please, the universe laughs when you do.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-24 15:14
Your emotional bluster is not helping anyone.
Again, the conversation is ended.
Openvaet - 2025-09-24 15:14
Except that we’re still waiting for a spreadsheet.
Ethical Skeptic - 2025-09-24 15:14
A meaningless statement.
Openvaet - 2025-09-24 15:16
Instead we got a half-bible of Ethical Desceptik gibberish.
Why is even Clare finding your work “over claiming coupled with hidden methodology” ; while you claim she reproduced your frauds?
* Ethical Skeptic left *
… And that wrapped up the conversation.
But it won’t wrap up the exposure of this fraud. People like this - ego-driven to the core - will keep insisting they were right, shouting into an ever-shrinking echo chamber.
The more people demand a reproducible methodology, the smaller that chamber will get - and his credibility has already taken a serious beating these past few days.
Thanks to everyone who stuck with me in this exchange and took of their precious time to expose his manipulations as well.
US Data: Census Flaws, Alert Signals, Births & Deaths
TL;DR Accurate census data matters - Errors or policy-driven adjustments can distort population denominators, impacting public health statistics, risk assessment, and “alert signals” (e.g., cancer rates per 100k).
Wow, that was a long read.
It is super important that faked data and/or faked analysis is exposed so I appreciate the discussion.
I will say that listening to the two of you hurl childish insults at each other is exhausting. The reality is the truth will out so you don't have to sling insults at each other.
That said, everyone needs to be able to defend their assertions by showing their data and analysis so others can reproduce it. I'm pretty sure that will show who is right and who is wrong, no insults required. In my opinion if you don't want to play by this simple rule, you shouldn't get to play.
Thanks. A critical examination of this gentleman's graphic works is at least reasonable.