Scores by kind of claim
Each kind of claim is scored on its own, out of 100: the share that held up, with the range it likely falls in. Fewer resolved claims give a wider range.
-
Factual claims
Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
84 79 88 -
Predictions
Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?
Insufficient record: 2 predictions resolved, 5 needed for a score.
-
Promises
Commitments to the person's or organisation's own future action, with something to deliver: was it delivered?
Insufficient record: 3 promises resolved, 5 needed for a score.
-
Guidance
A company's own figures for its results over a period, checked against what it then reported.
Insufficient record: 1 guidance claim resolved, 5 needed for a score.
All types combined: 84 (likely 79 to 88, high confidence), from 90 claims: 90 factual claims. It mixes kinds of claim in different proportions for different people, so compare people kind by kind.
Jeff Bezos's claims
35 claims
“The booster is fully reusable.”
Jeff Bezos, Blue Origin founder, narrating video 20 September 2018 Full transcript: Jeff Bezos shares Amazon management wisdom (GeekWire)
The booster being described is fully reusable and lands down range on a ship.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.
What would count as true or false
Judge as of 20 September 2018. The claim describes the design of the booster Bezos was presenting (Blue Origin's New Glenn first stage). It is not a claim that the booster had already flown and been reused, so a reuse flight is not required. True: Blue Origin's published specifications at the time describe the first stage as fully reusable and as landing downrange on a ship or sea platform. Mostly true: the design is described as reusable and landing on a ship, but with a minor difference in detail, for example 'reusable for a target number of flights' or a different description of the landing platform. Mixed: only one of the two parts holds, for example reusable but not landing on a ship downrange. Mostly false: the booster was designed to be only partly reusable, or reuse was only a later aspiration, not the stated design. False: Blue Origin's specifications at the time show an expendable booster, or one with no ship landing.
Evidence
- New Glenn: Blue Origin's powerful reusable rocket Space.com · 1 May 2018
“New Glenn's first stage was designed to be reusable, capable of launching up to 100 times.”
- New Glenn: Blue Origin's powerful reusable rocket Space.com · 1 May 2018
“The New Glenn booster will come back to Earth for vertical, powered landings on a drone ship at sea, about 620 miles (1,000 kilometers) downrange of the launch site.”
- New Glenn - Wikipedia Wikipedia Own record
“The first stage boosters of New Glenn are intended to be reusable, and were originally intended to be recovered downrange on the Atlantic Ocean via their landing platform ship Jacklyn, which would have acted as a floating movable landing platform.”
- New Glenn | Blue Origin Blue Origin · 11 September 2024 Own record
“Following separation, the first stage autonomously descends to a landing platform located 620 miles (1,000 km) downrange.”
Reasoning
Space.com, writing in May 2018 independently of Blue Origin, reported that New Glenn's first stage "was designed to be reusable, capable of launching up to 100 times" (E1). The same article said the booster would make vertical landings on a drone ship about 620 miles (1,000 km) downrange (E2). E3 also describes the original plan to recover the booster downrange on a landing platform ship, and E4, a 2024 Blue Origin page, describes landing on a platform 620 miles (1,000 km) downrange without saying whether it is a ship. Both parts of the claim match the design described before the judge date, but the reporting gives reuse as a target of up to 100 flights, not unqualified "full" reuse. The criteria name that kind of difference as an example of mostly true.
Cite this claim
Jeff Bezos, “The booster being described is fully reusable and lands down range on a ship.” (said 20 September 2018). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_474c824f2da5, method 0.1.0+c876030c. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_474c824f2da5
Claims without a verdict
Is a verdict here wrong, or do you speak for Jeff Bezos? Reply on the claim's own page, with the form at its foot (how replies work). Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts and scores are made.