Speaker summary
⁠69%1 analyzed article/video77 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Noah Edwardsen results contain 4 faulty reasoning types, including Self-Serving Bias, Straw Man, and Framing Effect, with Ad Hominem as the most egregious example at 72.7% saturation with 56 hits. Analysis detected 189 faulty-reasoning hits from 77 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 61.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠76% (6,901 of 28,364 speakers). This Noah Edwardsen is worse (more manipulative) than 75.70% of the peer group.
Noah Edwardsen
Speaker details
Total words: 77
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

76% percentile
025507510075.7% percentile
61.4% BS Score1 analyzed videos77 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–100%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%Straw ManSitewide 0.9%Speaker 72.7%72.7%Ad HominemSitewide 2.2%Speaker 72.7%72.7%Self-Serving BiasSitewide 3.7%Speaker 72.7%72.7%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 27.3%27.3%

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%Ad Hominem: Speaker 72.7%, sitewide 2.2%Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 72.7%, sitewide 3.7%Straw Man: Speaker 72.7%, sitewide 0.9%Framing Effect: Speaker 27.3%, sitewide 26.9%Ad HominemSitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos