Much better. It would be nice if we had an unbiased fact checker, but this will have to do. There is a great illustration of the basic problem
The only datum present is, "11 straight years of no major hurricanes striking land." This 100% factual. However, the checker refers to the conclusion, "bores a hole right through the whole climate change argument." as if it were presented as fact. There are five Rush cites and every one of them is an opinion. Yet, they are all marked as half-truth to pants-on-fire.
The information was factual and the checker could not get it any more wrong. The one quoted is particularly bad because it does not even check the one thing presented as a fact.
J
RUSH LIMBAUGH
Says "11 straight years of no major hurricanes striking land" in the United States "bores a hole right through the whole climate change argument."
Pants on Fire! Can't blow away climate change
Says "11 straight years of no major hurricanes striking land" in the United States "bores a hole right through the whole climate change argument."
Pants on Fire! Can't blow away climate change
The only datum present is, "11 straight years of no major hurricanes striking land." This 100% factual. However, the checker refers to the conclusion, "bores a hole right through the whole climate change argument." as if it were presented as fact. There are five Rush cites and every one of them is an opinion. Yet, they are all marked as half-truth to pants-on-fire.
The information was factual and the checker could not get it any more wrong. The one quoted is particularly bad because it does not even check the one thing presented as a fact.
J
Comment