NTD⁠100%

Fetterman: Hope Next Time We All Pursuing Truth Beyond Partisan Lines ⁠98%

7/30/2026, 5:00:17 PM

Topics: Video
Keywords: Youtube

BS Summary: This video contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Burden of Proof, In-Group Bias, and Self-Serving Bias, with Begging the Question as the most egregious example at 49.5% saturation with 100 hits. Analysis detected 1,038 faulty-reasoning hits from 202 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 97.1% and a BS Rank of ⁠98% (524 of 22,830 videos). This video is worse (more manipulative) than 97.70% of the video peer group.

IĀ thinkĀ weĀ shouldĀ reallyĀ beĀ willingĀ toĀ pursueĀ truthĀ noĀ noĀ matterĀ whereĀ thatĀ mayĀ haveĀ emerged,Ā youĀ know,Ā afterĀ forĀ allĀ ofĀ that.Ā 
AndĀ andĀ thatĀ isĀ earlyĀ onĀ thatĀ thereĀ wasĀ theĀ theoryĀ thatĀ theĀ virusĀ couldĀ haveĀ emergedĀ fromĀ theĀ lab.Ā 
AndĀ earlyĀ onĀ thatĀ becameĀ likeĀ aĀ right-wingĀ kindsĀ ofĀ theory.Ā 
AndĀ IĀ thoughtĀ itĀ seemedĀ toĀ makeĀ sense.Ā 
Now,Ā thereĀ wasĀ aĀ reallyĀ advancedĀ labĀ thatĀ wasĀ closeĀ by,Ā andĀ thenĀ youĀ haveĀ thisĀ unknownĀ virusĀ uhĀ out.Ā So,Ā uhĀ butĀ thatĀ becameĀ aĀ veryĀ partisanĀ thing.Ā 
AndĀ now,Ā uhĀ itĀ seemsĀ nowĀ it'sĀ moreĀ andĀ moreĀ emergingĀ theoryĀ thatĀ thatĀ wouldĀ haveĀ comeĀ fromĀ fromĀ theĀ lab.Ā 
>>Ā [snorts]Ā 
>>Ā Now,Ā youĀ know,Ā IĀ hope,Ā IĀ thinkĀ thatĀ theĀ nextĀ timeĀ ourĀ nationsĀ facingĀ somethingĀ likeĀ this,Ā weĀ areĀ notĀ become,Ā youĀ know,Ā asĀ IĀ mightĀ haveĀ been,Ā blindedĀ byĀ theĀ partisanĀ ideaĀ thatĀ maybeĀ theĀ truthĀ mightĀ comeĀ fromĀ aĀ sideĀ that'sĀ differentĀ thanĀ thanĀ youĀ are.Ā ButĀ IĀ thinkĀ weĀ shouldĀ reallyĀ beĀ willingĀ toĀ pursueĀ truthĀ noĀ noĀ matterĀ whereĀ thatĀ mayĀ haveĀ emerged,Ā youĀ know,Ā afterĀ forĀ allĀ ofĀ that.Ā 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
24.3%
Representativeness Heuristic
19.8%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
17.8%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
4%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
13.4%
Self-Serving Bias
37.1%
Fundamental Attribution Error
37.1%
Actor-Observer Bias
12.4%
In-Group Bias
42.6%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
5.4%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
10.4%
Primacy Effect
15.3%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
5.4%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
0%
False Dilemma
5.4%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
34.7%
Red Herring
19.8%
Bandwagon
10.4%
Appeal to Emotion
5%
Begging the Question
49.5%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
24.3%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
49.5%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
9.9%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
17.8%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
5.4%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
0%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
37.1%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

202 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.