Speaker summary
⁠78%1 analyzed article/video107.5 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Tom Hiltachk results contain 5 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Unattributed Quote, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 59.5% saturation with 63.921 hits. Analysis detected 209.776 faulty-reasoning hits from 107.5 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 33.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠53% (13,562 of 28,364 speakers). This Tom Hiltachk is worse (more manipulative) than 52.20% of the peer group.
Tom Hiltachk
Speaker ranking list
Speaker details
Total words: 107.5
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed speakers

52% percentile
025507510052.2% percentile
33.7% BS Score1 analyzed videos107.5 analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

SpeakerSitewideShared scale 0–75%
0.0%20%40%60%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide 11.1%Speaker 59.5%59.5%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Speaker 40.8%40.8%Unattributed QuoteSitewide 1.1%Speaker 24.7%24.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)Sitewide 3.3%Speaker 24.7%24.7%Overconfidence BiasSitewide 4.6%Speaker 18.7%18.7%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%20%20%40%40%60%60%Appeal to Authority: Speaker 59.5%, sitewide 11.1%Confirmation Bias: Speaker 40.8%, sitewide 7.5%Post Hoc (False Cause): Speaker 24.7%, sitewide 3.3%Unattributed Quote: Speaker 24.7%, sitewide 1.1%Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 18.7%, sitewide 4.6%Appeal to AuthoritySitewide rateSpeaker rate

Analyzed articles and videos