Claim register

Claim Evaluation

Every claim is stated exactly, traced to its origin, and evaluated against the best supporting and the best opposing case. Scientific claims must expose their full reasoning chain — observation, measurement, calculation, prediction, physical test, result, replication — and declare per-model predictions BEFORE the result is shown. Appeals to authority (“science says”, “experts agree”, “the math proves it”, “settled”) are not evidence. Confidence is authored, not tallied. Preserve disagreement rather than force a conclusion.

← Show all claims

  • The United Nations emblem depicts a north-polar azimuthal-equidistant projection

    Supported

    The map inside the UN emblem is a north-polar azimuthal-equidistant projection framed by olive branches.

    Origin: UN emblem specification, WIPO 6ter registry.

    Best supporting case

    The UN's own emblem description names the projection type. The emblem's use is heraldic — a design choice, not a cosmological claim.

    Best opposing case

    Some argue the choice of projection is evidence of an institutional cosmology. That is an inference about intent, not about the emblem's geometric identity.

    Evidence

    Circular-reasoning check

    • Treats agreement among institutions as physical evidence

    Hidden assumptions

    • That an organization's emblem reflects its factual worldview. The emblem was designed as a heraldic device.

    Missing evidence

    • Meeting minutes or design memos that would explain why the projection was chosen over alternatives.

    Contradictions

    — none recorded —

    Reproducibility

    • Directly checkable against the emblem image.

    Confidence · high

    The narrow claim (what projection the emblem depicts) is settled by the emblem's own specification. Broader claims about intent are separate.

    Confidence is authored, not tallied. It reflects primary vs. secondary evidence, source independence, methodology, conflicts, and reproducibility — not the count of sources.