Let me remind you, the articles that I have given you are directly obtained from NSO, the National Statistics Office of the Philippines which manages and executes the census in the Philippines. As far as I know, my resources are definitely defined than what you have. Stating my point that your data should be coherent and available to everyone, because without that proper statement of where your so-called evidences come from, it basically states that your data itself is unreliable.

Again to strike that “comparing through certain parameters like GNI, GDP, PPP, etc.”, it was NEVER EVER mentioned in ANY TYPE of ARTICLE to say SOMETHING is BETTER due to anyone of THESE. It is always a stated opinion, and as I can see in your article, your stating it as if it is a fact. With that, in the minds of common people, some may think that it is actually true, to the point you’re already denouncing or worse backlashing (that anonymity in your username made me think so). Have you ever thought of the result of what you’re doing? It’s leading to discrimination, you don’t just destroy Duterte’s name, you’re already vandalizing the reputation of the said cities. My point here is to NEVER CONCLUDE of the nature of a city based only on certain parameters, in this case its government, and demographics. And let me send this back to you. You already pointed that (1) “data is always limited, that you can’t go deeper after a certain point” let me correct you, it is NEVER LIMITED and it is ALWAYS BEING GENERATED to the point it is INFINITE. And let’s “assume” that what you’re principle is true, then aren’t you going against what you’ve just said? Why are you making such conclusion when data is limited? It would prove unreliable, and as such a fallacy. You’re already making a Type 2 Error, in what you’ve stated in your comments and how you’ve reacted against my comment against your article.

Washing aside the technicalities, I’m making this part personal. How dare you make accusation on me? You don’t even know me personally. As I’ve said, I SIMPLY STATED YOUR FLAWS IN YOUR ARTICLE, NOT YOU AS AN INDIVIDUAL. I’m even offering you help, and now you’re trying to make claims against my philosophies? Well, let me tell you, my philosophy might be way flawed, it is surely been tested and dates back since the time of Aristotle, actually waaaaaaaay back when the fire was first discovered. I’m using an improved universal philosophy of science on you, for your information; and again I MIGHT HELP you this time with this… or your ego and “presumed beliefs stuck on you”.

Very Sincerely.