trustme.bro/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim
Archduke Franz Ferdinand mowed down animals with a machine gun
the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
1 source for · 0 against
AS REPORTEDno primary record reached; this is what the reporting says

Retrieved biographical writing documents that Archduke Franz Ferdinand used a machine gun to shoot large numbers of animals driven into his line of fire.

Evidence for · 1
2017 · cited by 0
... machine gun. Animals were driven into his line of fire so that he could mow them down in large numbers. According to ... Archduke Franz Ferdinand d'Este. In 1913 the archduke's passion for killing wild animals took him to Welbeck ... The alarming history of the British, and European, aristocracy - from Argyll to Wellington and from Byron to Tolstoy, stories of madness, murder, misery, greed and profligacy. From Regency playhouses, to which young noblemen would go simply in order to insult someone to provoke a duel that might further their reputation, to the fashionable gambling clubs or 'hells' which were springing up around St James's in the mid-eighteenth century, the often bizarre doings of aristocrats. An eighteenth-century English gentleman was required to have what was known as 'bottom', a shipping metaphor that referred to stability. Taking part in a duel was a bold statement that you had bottom. William Petty, 2nd Earl of Shelburne certainly had bottom, if not a complete set of gonads following his duel with Co
See more details
The analysis

rails:sufficiency:supported:single_source:for=1+0p:against=0+0p | v55:sufficiency

Everything we examined (1)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.
  1. Mad, Bad and Dangerous to Knowreferenceno side taken
This receipt carries no identity, shared or not. Sharing publishes your connection to it, not your data.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.
This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt