Loch Ness Monster
Claim: A large, unidentified aquatic creature, often thought to be a surviving plesiosaur, inhabits Loch Ness in Scotland.
Bullshit Meter
Pure ontological fiction, excluding real psychological effects.
Physics vs. mind loop
Does it work in the physical world, or only through belief and behaviour?
Neither physically real nor a meaningful psychological loop.
Bio & cult hazard
13.1%Risk of abandoning medicine and of getting trapped in a closed group.
Topological fingerprint
The structural profile of the claim on five axes.
- Empirical rigor
- 27.6%
- Magic & dogma
- 16.3%
- Rhetorical fog
- 32.9%
- Conspiracy
- 25.6%
- Psychosocial
- 6.0%
Ockham's guillotine
What remains after cutting away the unfalsifiable superstructure.
Scam & grift
11.9%How much it works as a money-extraction funnel.
Fog & Barnum
40.6%Protection from refutation through vagueness and stolen jargon.
Energy, frequency, vibration, quantum alignment, natural harmony, ancient wisdom, holistic balance…
- Barnum effect46.0%
- Motte-and-bailey18.0%
- Stolen jargon5.0%
Guru roulette
Does the result depend on who performs it?
Not applicable
Fossil & dogma clock
93.4%Does the field correct its errors, or is it frozen?
- 🚀Active science2.5%
- 🩹Degenerative patching59.4%
- 🎭Marketing chameleon23.2%
- 🦴Fossil in amber14.9%
Tin-foil hat reactor
23.4%How big a global conspiracy the claim needs.
Paranoia level 2/5 · A few bad actors