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

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were rebuilt after the 1945 atomic bombings and have been continuously inhabited since.

the verdict
INSUFFICIENT LEANING
Recorded sources
3 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 Hiroshima and Nagasaki were rebuilt after the 1945 atomic bombings and have been continuously inhabited since?

Unclear. Reference material documents that Hiroshima was rebuilt after the war and that Nagasaki was reconstructed from the ashes, but no retrieved source addresses the claim's second element, that both cities have been continuously inhabited since 1945.

Verdict: PARTIAL LEAN · 3 sources for, 0 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 · 3
Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Get citation
Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. (n.d.). en.wikipedia.org. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

See more details
More for · 2
Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Get citation
Hiroshima and Nagasaki. (n.d.). en.wikipedia.org. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

Resurrecting Nagasaki: Reconstruction, the Urakami Catholics, and Atomic Memory, 1945-1970
2013
Get citation
Richard, D. C. (2013). Resurrecting Nagasaki: Reconstruction, the Urakami Catholics, and Atomic Memory, 1945-1970. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.7916/D8TH8V1G

Receipt History
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