Topic summary
⁠0%1 analyzed article/video565 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Religious Justification For War results contain 29 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Confirmation Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Politically Left Leaning Bias as the most egregious example at 17.2% saturation with 388 hits. Analysis detected 3,146 faulty-reasoning hits from 2,260 analyzed words across 1 article, generating a BS Score of 4.8% and a BS Rank of ⁠75% (4,227 of 16,562 topics). This Religious Justification For War is worse (more manipulative) than 74.50% of the peer group.
Religious Justification For War
Topic ranking list
PercentileTopicBS Score
⁠0%Uber1%
⁠0%Pittsburgh Pirates1%
⁠0%Opera1%
⁠0%Holocaust1%
⁠0%Privacy Policy1%
⁠75%Religious Justification For War (selected)5%
⁠100%Radio Roundup / Week In Review60%
⁠100%E-Bikes / Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%E Bikes Rad Power Bikes60%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence O'donnell69%
⁠100%The Last Word With Lawrence Odonnell69%
Topic details
Total words: 2,260
Article count: 1
Authors

Ranking context

Position among analyzed topics

75% percentile
025507510074.5% percentile
4.8% BS Score1 analyzed articles2.3K analyzed words

Reasoning profile

Selected profile versus the sitewide rate

TopicSitewideShared scale 0–50%
0.0%10%20%30%40%50%Framing EffectSitewide 26.9%Topic 6.5%6.5%Politically Left Leaning …Sitewide 2.0%Topic 17.2%17.2%Negativity BiasSitewide 19.2%Topic 7.3%7.3%Availability HeuristicSitewide 9.1%Topic 0.7%0.7%Biased Writer VoiceSitewide 5.3%Topic 13.4%13.4%Out-Group Homogeneity BiasSitewide 3.1%Topic 9.1%9.1%Confirmation BiasSitewide 7.5%Topic 13.4%13.4%Optimism BiasSitewide 6.0%Topic 0.7%0.7%Appeal to EmotionSitewide 15.9%Topic 11.5%11.5%Halo EffectSitewide 6.7%Topic 2.7%2.7%

Sitewide departure map

Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often

0.0%0.0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%Framing Effect: Topic 6.5%, sitewide 26.9%Negativity Bias: Topic 7.3%, sitewide 19.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias: Topic 17.2%, sitewide 2.0%Appeal to Emotion: Topic 11.5%, sitewide 15.9%Biased Writer Voice: Topic 13.4%, sitewide 5.3%Confirmation Bias: Topic 13.4%, sitewide 7.5%Appeal to Authority: Topic 12.8%, sitewide 11.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 9.1%, sitewide 3.1%Availability Heuristic: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 9.1%Hasty Generalization: Topic 8.4%, sitewide 8.1%In-Group Bias: Topic 6.0%, sitewide 6.9%Halo Effect: Topic 2.7%, sitewide 6.7%Optimism Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.0%Anecdotal: Topic 3.5%, sitewide 5.2%Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 3.9%, sitewide 3.3%Self-Serving Bias: Topic 2.9%, sitewide 3.7%Horn Effect: Topic 3.0%, sitewide 1.0%Recency Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.7%False Dilemma: Topic 2.5%, sitewide 1.5%Ad Hominem: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 2.2%Genetic Fallacy: Topic 2.0%, sitewide 1.4%Representativeness Heuristic: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 1.9%Indoctrination: Topic 1.8%, sitewide 0.0%Begging the Question: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 1.7%Framing EffectSitewide rateTopic rate

Analyzed articles and videos