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

Coal is a renewable resource.

the verdict
REFUTED
the evidence says no
Recorded sources
3 sources for · 2 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 coal is a renewable resource?

No. Two authoritative reference sources state plainly that coal is a non-renewable resource, formed over hundreds of millions of years. A few textbook-exercise and game-book fragments contain the sentence 'coal is a renewable resource,' but these are exercise prompts or fiction, not support.

Verdict: REFUTED · 3 sources for, 2 against · Last checked

Evidence for · 3
2015
Get citation
author, W. A. (2015). Minecraft blockopedia. archive.org. https://archive.org/details/minecraftblockop0000wilt

Evidence against · 2
Get citation
LibreTexts: 6.27%3A Renewable and Nonrenewable Resources. (n.d.). bio.libretexts.org. https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_and_General_Biology/Introductory_Biology_(CK-12)/06%3A_Ecology/6.27%3A_Renewable_and_Nonrenewable_Resources

See more details
More for · 2
2007
Get citation
inc, H. R. a. W. (2007). Holt science and technology : short courses. archive.org. https://archive.org/details/holtsciencetechn00_2

2005
Get citation
inc, H. R. a. W. (2005). Holt science & technology : Environmental science. archive.org. https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780030255410

More against · 1
Get citation
What is renewable energy? | United Nations. (n.d.). un.org. https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/what-is-renewable-energy

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