Disclaimer and Policy

1. Accuracy: Debunked.cc strives for absolute accuracy in the evaluation of claims that are investigated. Infallibility is impossible. We use the research skills and resources at our disposal to make the most accurate evaluation we can. Our objective is nothing but (i) the reaching of certainty with respect to a given claim and (ii) the sharing of our evaluation and evidence or justification with everyone else. Not only is infallibility impossible, but reaching certainty is difficult and not something to be expected as a regular occurrence. We will do our best. We are committed to Truth with a capital ‘T’ and will carry out our work accordingly.

2. Nature of evaluations: We aim to keep things simple. There are only two categories of evaluation: true and false. These will be colour coded green and red respectively, and linked to the corresponding evidence or justification. No claim will be evaluated where we cannot say ‘we are certain this is true/false’. If, in the course of an investigation, we find that we are unable to reach certainty, we will abandon the investigation and not report it in any way. You will not hear about it. For every claim on the site, you should interpret the evaluation thus: ‘This claim is true/false’. Of course, what this means is that we at Debunked.cc believe, with certainty, that it is true/false.

3. Selection of claims for evaluation: Debunked.cc is totally apolitical, unaffiliated with any organisation whatsoever, and committed to evaluating claims wherever they are found and by whom they are made. The only criteria for selection are one or more of the following: (i) the claim prominent or widespread, asserted or believed by a good number of people; (ii) the claim, though not widespread, is one whose truth or falsity is of consequence for many people, i.e. in our opinion it is important enough to be worth investigating; (iii) the claim is simply interesting to us, might well be interesting to others, and so worth investigating. In each case, it might be that we antecedently suspect the claim to have a truth value (true or false) opposite to what many people assert or believe. That will prompt further investigation, but that investigation will go in whatever direction it goes. We are always on the lookout for confirmation bias. For other claims, we will have no antecedent view.

4. Independence: Investigations by Debunked.cc are conducted independently and are not influenced by advertisers, sponsors, or any external parties.

5. Sources and procedure: We cannot and do not provide a procedure for investigation. There is no specific protocol. There is no ranking of sources. We investigate each claim individually, presenting our evaluation and our evidence or justification. It is up to the reader as to whether the evidence or justification supports the evaluation. Obviously, not all sources are equal, and it is also impossible to evaluate sources, and sources for sources, ad infinitum or to the beginning of recorded history. We will simply use experience and discretion in selecting sources for evidence and justification, and if they are the ones chosen then it is simply up to the reader to decide whether to rely on them as much as we have, or at all for that matter.

7. Who made the claim? Generally, we will provide one or more sources for the claim being evaluated itself. These could be prominent sources in the legacy media, ‘influencers’ on social media, celebrities, well-known commentators, academics, politicians, etc. Or, if the claim itself is sufficiently widespread, we might just give a representative source of no special importance; or we may give no source at all. Often, with urban legends for example, it is hard to pin down the source of the claim or anyone who explicitly makes it. The same for various cultural and social assumptions, embedded biases, and so on. In other words, a source for a claim itself will not always be given.

6. Limitations: As well as not investigating trivialities, we do not investigate subjective opinions. We do not investigate probabilities of events (though we might investigate a probability directly, e.g. if the claim is ‘the probability of tossing heads on a fair, double-sided coin is 1/3’, we evaluate it as false!). We do not make predictions. We do not make moral judgments. We do not make aesthetic judgments. We stick to facts and the verifiable in a way that should satisfy anyone of sound mind and good will.

7. Non-endorsement: The evaluation of a claim does not imply endorsement or opposition to the claim or the entity making the claim.

8. Corrections: Debunked.cc will not enter into correspondence regarding corrections to evaluations or sources, as this would end up being inordinately cumbersome and time consuming. We will update all evaluations and sources if new information becomes available to us.

9. Fair use: The use of copyrighted material on this website is done under the principles of fair use for educational and informational purposes.

10. Legal disclaimer: Nothing on the website is intended to constitute legal advice or professional advice, or advice of any other kind. Readers need to seek their own advice should anything of this website be of any practical interest or use to them.

11. User responsibility: Users of this site have their own personal responsibility to critically evaluate information and not solely rely on anything on this site for their decision-making.

12. Contact: info@debunked.cc. We reserve the right not to answer any email and offer no guarantee whatsoever that we will get back to you about anything.

END