Without discounting the possibility that there may be some astroturfing, I think it's far more likely that you've run afoul of community expectations.
The HN guidelines specifically suggest you resist commenting on downvotes, and people take that seriously here. Editing your comment to add meta-commentary on votes will generally just get you more downvotes.
Additionally, your comments are fairly polarizing. You make statements about how something is obvious, but then provide nothing besides anecdotal evidence. If it's that obvious, real evidence should be easy to show, otherwise it's possibly not as clear as you think. You could possibly have avoided this problem by framing it as a question and leaving an opening for someone to provide a better answer. This also invites people who disagree, or have a different interpretation to engage in a useful way, rather than starting off in an antagonistic way. For example, stating something "absolutely and unequivocally" without evidence won't generally be seen useful to the discussion here.
The HN guidelines specifically suggest you resist commenting on downvotes, and people take that seriously here. Editing your comment to add meta-commentary on votes will generally just get you more downvotes.
Additionally, your comments are fairly polarizing. You make statements about how something is obvious, but then provide nothing besides anecdotal evidence. If it's that obvious, real evidence should be easy to show, otherwise it's possibly not as clear as you think. You could possibly have avoided this problem by framing it as a question and leaving an opening for someone to provide a better answer. This also invites people who disagree, or have a different interpretation to engage in a useful way, rather than starting off in an antagonistic way. For example, stating something "absolutely and unequivocally" without evidence won't generally be seen useful to the discussion here.