Speaker summary
⁠54%1 analyzed article/video61 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Amazon Employees for Climate Justice results contain 8 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, In-Group Bias, and No True Scotsman, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 74.1% saturation with 80 hits. Analysis detected 322 faulty-reasoning hits from 61 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 37.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠55% (11,682 of 25,915 speakers). This Amazon Employees for Climate Justice is worse (more manipulative) than 54.90% of the peer group.
Amazon Employees for Climate Justice

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

55% percentile
025507510054.9% percentile
37.3% BS Score1 analyzed videos61 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 74.1%74.1%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 74.1%74.1%No True ScotsmanSitewide 0.1%Speaker 37.0%37.0%Tu QuoqueSitewide 0.2%Speaker 37.0%37.0%In-Group BiasSitewide 6.9%Speaker 37.0%37.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 13.0%13.0%Anchoring BiasSitewide 4.0%Speaker 13.0%13.0%AnecdotalSitewide 5.2%Speaker 13.0%13.0%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%80%80%100%100%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 74.1%, sitewide 15.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 74.1%, sitewide 19.2%In-Group Bias: Speaker 37.0%, sitewide 6.9%No True Scotsman: Speaker 37.0%, sitewide 0.1%Tu Quoque: Speaker 37.0%, sitewide 0.2%Anchoring Bias: Speaker 13.0%, sitewide 4.0%Anecdotal: Speaker 13.0%, sitewide 5.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 13.0%, sitewide 3.3%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos