trustme.bro/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim
If P then Q and Q only if P are logically equivalent statements
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

Standard logical definitions confirm that the conditional statement 'if P then Q' is logically equivalent to 'Q only if P'.

Evidence for · 1
Logic, sets, & numbers
1976 · cited by 0
implication p ^q {If p, then q) is the impli¬ cation '^p ~q {If not p, then not q) that … (p V q) and ~ ( ~/7 (b) ~(p A and ^ (c) (~p ~q) and (q ^p) (d) r A (p -^q) and [(~p … statements (/> ^ ~?) and ~(q ^ ~p) are (a) logically equivalent (b) contradictory (c)
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. Logic, sets, & numbersreferenceno side taken
The paper trail · every fact has a biography
held for human review08 Aug 2026
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