Skip to content

answers: Who was responsible for the Nord Stream sabotage?

The UK Royal Navy was involved.

inferred — expert-testimony

No event time was recorded for this claim — the text gave nothing to anchor it to, and a guessed date would be worse than none.

Standing

lens: Evidence-weighted Structural

9.5% belief under Evidence-weighted · -2.25 log-odds · derived, never stored

Every contribution to this claim's belief under **Evidence-weighted**. Starting point: the floor (-3 log-odds — an unsupported claim starts near zero, not at "maybe"). Contributions sum to +0.75; the result is -2.25 log-odds = 9.5%.
Direction	What it rests on	Base	Leg	CQ factor	Contribution
support	Russian Ministry of Defense claimed the UK Royal Navy was involved, citing recovered fragments of a British‑made submarine drone. scheme expert-testimony (CQ favorable ⇒ ×1), independent leg #1 ⇒ ÷1	1	#1	×1	+1.00
challenge	Is the source genuinely in a position to know? scheme expert-testimony (CQ open ⇒ ×0.5), independent leg #1 ⇒ ÷1	0.5	#1	×0.5	-0.25

0 evidentiary legs 0 sources 3 challenges contested

Questions this bears on

Offered as an answer to:

Who was responsible for the Nord Stream sabotage?

6 branches · 2 sources

8.7% The UK Royal Navy was involved.

6.9% Tucker Carlson suggested that President Joe Biden could be responsible…

4.3% Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh publishes a self‑sourced article…

77% unknown — none of the above

What bears on it

challenges Does the source have an interest in this conclusion?
challenges Is the claim independently corroborated?
challenges Is the source genuinely in a position to know?
supports Russian Ministry of Defense
supports Russian Ministry of Defense claimed the UK Royal Navy was involved, citing recovered fragments of a British‑made submarine drone.
- supports British‑made submarine drone fragments
- challenges The UK Ministry of Defence called the claim a "lie".
- contradicts The UK Ministry of Defence called the claim a "lie".

Shown to three levels; follow any claim to see its own structure.

Voices

No asserter is recorded for this claim.

How it was derived

Nobody asserted this. The model applied the expert-testimony scheme (v1) to premises already in the record, at derivation depth 1.

Premises:

Critical questions — the standard challenges to this kind of inference:

Sources

No source is recorded on this claim directly.

Who and what it involves

Russian Ministry of Defense

Origin: produced by scheme:expert-testimony@v1