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

Bases always accept protons.

the verdict
CONTESTED PARTIAL
Recorded sources
2 sources for · 1 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 bases always accept protons?

Partly. A chemistry reference defines a base as a species that can receive a proton, and a test-prep text says a base can accept a proton, supporting the claim only in the weaker 'can' sense. A chemistry education article notes that bases can protonate reactants, i.e. act as proton donors, pointing against 'always accept'.

Verdict: CONTESTED PARTIAL · 2 sources for, 1 against · Last checked

The private library was unavailable for some searches in this check. Missing library results are not evidence against the claim.

Evidence for · 2
Solvent Effects in Chemistry
2015
Get citation
Buncel, E. & Stairs, R. A. (2015). Solvent Effects in Chemistry. books.google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=80IxBwAAQBAJ&dq=Bases+always+accept+protons.&hl=&as_pt=BOOKS&source=gbs_api

Evidence against · 1
The Roles of Acids and Bases in Enzyme Catalysis
2007
Get citation
M., W. H. (2007). The Roles of Acids and Bases in Enzyme Catalysis. eric.ed.gov. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ820738

See more details
More for · 1
DAT Prep Plus 2023-2024
2023
Get citation
Prep, K. T. (2023). DAT Prep Plus 2023-2024. books.google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=h-CoEAAAQBAJ&dq=Bases+always+accept+protons.&hl=&as_pt=BOOKS&source=gbs_api

Receipt History
held for human review18 Oct 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.

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