This is simply a more sophisticated attempt at the same old Hortian circular nonsense, similar to the Daniel Wallace statistical illiteracy.

This came up in the Sinaiticus-Hermas posts in Feb, 2018 in the textualcriticism forum, so for now I will just note a few quotes. Later, by the grace of the Lord Jesus, we can discuss the sad joke of modern statistical apologetics for the New Testament Critical text.

Tommy Wasserman,
For the text of Hermas in Sinaiticus compared to other witnesses, see K. Martin Heide, “Assessing the Stability of the Transmitted Texts of the New Testament and the Shepherd of Hermas” in: The Textual Reliability of the New Testament: Bart D. Ehrman and Daniel Wallace in Dialogue, ed. by Robert Stewart, Minneapolis: Fortress Press 2011: 125–159 (Heide’s collation of Sinaiticus against P. Bodmer 38, dated to the 4/5th cent., by the way, shows that these two MSS agree 91.2%)
Almost 5,000 of the 7,947 verses of the New Testament, as contained in the major text-critical editions in the last one-hundred-fifty years (Tischendorf, Westcott-Hort, von Soden, Vogels, Merk, Bover, Nestle-Aland), show no differences at all in the text.1 Can the stability of the New Testament text be defined more accurately?2"
"And finally, variants were introduced at the climax of the Byzantine culture during the ninth through the twelfth centuries."
"Theoretically speaking, if one were to compare 2,500 papyri instead of the twenty-five papyri used in the calculation above, then our spectrum of variation would be a hundred times greater."
obsolete discussions concerning the Comma Johanneum (1 Jn. 5:9)