Speaker summary
⁠97%1 analyzed article/video18 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Court of Federal Claims results contain 1 faulty reasoning type, including Appeal to Authority, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 18 hits. Analysis detected 18 faulty-reasoning hits from 18 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 100% and a BS Rank of ⁠97% (981 of 28,364 speakers). This Court of Federal Claims is worse (more manipulative) than 96.50% of the peer group.
Court of Federal Claims
Speaker details
Total words: 18
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

97% percentile
025507510096.5% percentile
100.0% BS Score1 analyzed videos18 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 100.0%100.0%

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%120%120%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 11.1%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos