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 73 93 -
Predictions
Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?
46 27 65 -
Promises
Commitments to the person's or organisation's own future action, with something to deliver: was it delivered?
60 40 79
All types combined: 70 (likely 61 to 78, medium confidence), from 29 claims: 16 factual claims, 7 predictions, 6 promises. It mixes kinds of claim in different proportions for different people, so compare people kind by kind.
Ørsted's claims
46 claims
“Halting climate change requires a fundamental transformation of the world's energy systems from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources.”
Thomas Thune Andersen, Chairman 2017 DONG Energy Annual report 2016 Summary (DONG Energy)
Halting climate change requires a fundamental transformation of the world's energy systems from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources.
Not checkable An opinion, value judgement or statement with nothing to check.
Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.
Cite this claim
Ørsted, “Halting climate change requires a fundamental transformation of the world's energy systems from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources.” (said 2017). Verdict: not checkable. Reliability API, claim c_bfec8cc2af5b, method 0.1.0+7831dd9d. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_bfec8cc2af5b
Claims without a verdict
Is a verdict here wrong, or do you speak for Ørsted? 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.