Likely something happened that is politically incorrect to even name, the bias is incredible given the troughs for tsunamis and nuclear plant meltdowns are a me

Likely something happened that is politically incorrect to even name, the bias is incredible given the troughs for tsunamis and nuclear plant meltdowns are a mere blip compared to Hillary not getting elected. Also I'm not sure how/if they filter out bot traffic. Twitter, as I understand it, is mostly bots and fake follower accounts with human traffic being a tiny fraction of the data. Kinda like the old days of Usenet where 99% of the traffic was computers sending binaries to each other and only a tiny fraction was human to human text discussion. I would imagine the happiness sentiment of a mere repetitive shell script could distort the data such that the average is highly compressed around the 5 result. Possibly if we assume a nuclear plant meltdown should have scored a 1 on any realistic and reasonable human scale, then dropping only a tenth of that might indicate twitter is, to one sig fig, maybe ninety percent inhuman repetitive bot traffic. To some extent twitter is workforce automation for echo chambers and signalling group affinity and membership; I'm not sure the mood of an environment in that context means anything when related to the real world, which reduces the significance of horrible events resulting in small signals. Surely, tens of thousands of deaths and nuclear contamination have nothing to do with trying to fit in with the cool kids, or at least a tiny subset of the population who think they're cool kids, which is a counterexample to my mathematical model in the paragraph above.