Speaker summary
⁠70%1 analyzed article/video84 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Michael Lukens results contain 9 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Tu Quoque, and False Dilemma, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 50.4% saturation with 47.625 hits. Analysis detected 288.625 faulty-reasoning hits from 84 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 29.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠48% (15,004 of 28,364 speakers). This Michael Lukens is better (less manipulative) than 52.90% of the peer group.
Michael Lukens
Speaker details
Total words: 84
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

47% percentile
025507510047.1% percentile
29.6% BS Score1 analyzed videos84 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Tu QuoqueSitewide 0.2%Speaker 49.2%49.2%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Speaker 50.4%50.4%IndoctrinationSitewide 0.0%Speaker 24.6%24.6%False DilemmaSitewide 1.5%Speaker 24.6%24.6%Slippery SlopeSitewide 1.7%Speaker 24.6%24.6%Quote-first MisdirectionSitewide 0.0%Speaker 21.4%21.4%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 21.4%21.4%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Speaker 25.4%25.4%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 24.6%24.6%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 50.4%, sitewide 15.9%Tu Quoque: Speaker 49.2%, sitewide 0.2%Framing Effect: Speaker 24.6%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Speaker 25.4%, sitewide 19.2%False Dilemma: Speaker 24.6%, sitewide 1.5%Indoctrination: Speaker 24.6%, sitewide 0.0%Slippery Slope: Speaker 24.6%, sitewide 1.7%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 21.4%, sitewide 11.1%Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 21.4%, sitewide 0.0%Appeal to EmotionSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos