Speaker summary
⁠90%1 analyzed article/video54 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Paul Niemeyer results contain 3 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority and Framing Effect, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 100% saturation with 54 hits. Analysis detected 137 faulty-reasoning hits from 54 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 84.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠83% (4,999 of 28,364 speakers). This Paul Niemeyer is worse (more manipulative) than 82.40% of the peer group.
Paul Niemeyer
Speaker details
Total words: 54
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

82% percentile
025507510082.4% percentile
84.6% BS Score1 analyzed videos54 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–125%
0.0%20%40%60%80%100%120%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide 0.8%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 100.0%100.0%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Speaker 53.7%53.7%

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%Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 0.8%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 100.0%, sitewide 11.1%Framing Effect: Speaker 53.7%, sitewide 26.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)Sitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos