1) The grandparent to your post accused the post of being linkbait, without explaining it in anyway. You appeared to be supporting this without any evidence that it was linkbait.
2) You took the discussion about it being linkbait, and introduced the accusation that the post was faked (not withstanding your "I'm not saying it is fake thing" - if you aren't saying that, then what are you saying?), which was totally unrelated to the thread of conversation.
3) You didn't provide any justification that it was fake - merely circumstantial evidence that doesn't preclude that it could be fake. It is pretty normal for someone to expose an exploit without independent verification - especially since it appears the author hadn't considered it a security hole (note the article doesn't mention security, and they didn't find the security@google.com email address which is pretty obvious if you are using the term "security" when you search).
Given these factors, I think the downvotes were justified.
I don't think there is anything wrong with being suspicious, but I think your post would have been better received if it had presented your suspicions differently.