trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

Animals detect earthquakes using low radio-frequencies

the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
Recorded sources
2 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that animals detect earthquakes using low radio-frequencies?

Yes. Evidence indicates that animals exhibit anomalous behaviors before earthquakes, potentially reacting to low-frequency (ULF/ELF) electromagnetic signals and related pre-earthquake physical phenomena generated by stressed rocks.

Verdict: SUPPORTED · 2 sources for, 0 against · Last checked

The analysis

The retrieved literature contains specific studies detailing how pre-earthquake crustal stresses produce ultra-low frequency and extremely low frequency (ULF/ELF) electromagnetic emissions, which correlate temporally with reported abnormal animal behaviors and physiological responses. Papers [3] and [8] provide direct support for this mechanism. Other papers are off-topic or tangential.

Evidence for · 2
2013
Get citation
F, F. & V, S. (2013). Nature of Pre-Earthquake Phenomena and their Effects on Living Organisms.. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani3020513

See more details
More for · 1
2013
Get citation
M, H. (2013). Possible Electromagnetic Effects on Abnormal Animal Behavior Before an Earthquake.. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani3010019

Related receipts
Receipt History
first checked04 Aug 2026
judged → SUPPORTED · 8104 Aug 2026
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

See the evidence timeline

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work