I appreciate the effort you put in, but honestly, from reading your piece alone, Wyner's premise seems far more credible than yours.

Maybe you don't have enough background in statistics to eyeball it, but the relatively low variance in total deaths, compared to the deaths that should make up that total, is very, very weird.

You simultaneously explain the low variance with broad action causing low day-to-day variation, and anticorrelation between men and women being caused by target selection (which only works if very small numbers of actions are driving events). You can't have it both ways.

The only credible explanation is that the Gaza health officials are reporting numbers that are partly made up; or they are somehow bandwidth limited and have pre-sorted men and women separately and are batching them for analysis. Given conditions in Gaza, the latter seems unlikely.

Now, they might not be making up numbers out of nothing at all. Maybe they can tell children, much of the time, because they're small; but can't always tell men from women. So they guess. Inconsistently. That would produce the inverse correlation.

Even the official confirmed-ID numbers have an implausible number of people who are in the 24/25 bin, which is because a huge number of people have their birth date as 2000-01-01 (obviously wrong, but hey, that doesn't mean they aren't real people necessarily, just that nobody bothered figuring out when they were actually born).

Anyway, we can be quite confident that we can't put too much trust in the numbers. We can't tell, however, in what way they're wrong.

That's the thing with statistical analyses. If everything is true, you find nothing weird. But when the data is inaccurate, you can't really determine how imaginary the data is.