Claim

The counted agricultural-lime passage states the 1900 baseline, estimated potential, catchment scale, and decadal lag but does not itself name the Mississippi River Basin.

Type TEXTUAL · truth-evaluable: yes · status at snapshot: ACTIVE · created seq 22561

a conjunction joins clauses that may be separately evaluablea comma-separated series may list several propositions

Referenced 66 times: checked 0, looked up by assistants 0, viewed 66, shared 0. A count of attention, not evidence.

Topics

Not filed under any topic yet.

Assessment

Contradicted

Score: 0.1419 under ledger-default@0.3.0 at snapshot 27745

3 of 4 review checks done · 1 counted · 2 by the author only

1 independent evidence lineage · review checks 1 of 4 · stability MEDIUM

Main unresolved issue: 1 counted evidence item has no independence review; repeats of one origin may be counted as several coverage:1460cca5-2429-821c-baa2-6ec1fa5587fa

Not yet independently audited.Evidence reviewed so far contradicts this claim, but only 1 of 4 review checks has been done.

Related: NARROWS outgoing: Supported

Why?

Strongest counted contradiction: The primary abstract explicitly names the Mississippi River Basin in the same passage that describes the agricultural-liming analysis. weight 1.800000 evidence

Review gaps: qualifiers reviewed, opposing search done, independence reviewed

What would most change this: One independent, direct measurement that supports this claim would move it from Contradicted to Unresolved.

Show calculation

Your view

Registered views

Nobody has registered a view yet.

Registered views are personal belief, not evidence: they never change Galedra's assessment. Affiliations are self-declared and shown only for groups of 5 or more.

Evidence for

None.

Evidence against

The primary abstract explicitly names the Mississippi River Basin in the same passage that describes the agricultural-liming analysis.

From Agricultural liming is a carbon sink in the Mississippi River Basin Read 2026-09-29 Relevance DIRECT Steps 0 Counted

The primary passage explicitly names the Mississippi River Basin, contrary to the leased claim’s omission.

Qualifications

None.

Suppressed as dependent

None.

Inferences

Concluded from

None.

Used as a premise in

None.

An inference is interpretation, not evidence: it never changes the assessment of its conclusion. Each premise is a claim with its own evidence.

Threads

None. Threads are for disagreements about how a determination was made — a statement whose figures are not in the passage it rests on, two sources that may share an origin. Something about the world belongs in the evidence above.

Claim edges

From	Relationship	To
fa5587fa	NARROWS	31d75e61

Review checklist

Review checks: 1 of 4

2 checks by this claim's own author, alongside the independent review above. 1 OPPOSING EVIDENCE SEARCH · 1 QUALIFIER CHECK. A check by the person who recorded a claim does not raise its review coverage.

Check	Done	By
qualifiers reviewed	no
opposing search done	no
independence reviewed	no
primary source reviewed	yes	f966131e

Summary

Contradicted. The main contradiction is: The primary abstract explicitly names the Mississippi River Basin in the same passage that describes the agricultural-liming analysis. 69de5e8b

A search for evidence in the opposing direction found something; see the counted evidence. c0568c2b

Review checks: 1 of 4. coverage:1460cca5-2429-821c-baa2-6ec1fa5587fa

Generated by stub-v0.1; every sentence cites graph ids.

Contribution history

seq	event	detail
22561	APPENDED
22562	ACCEPT	AUTOMATIC_AFTER_VALIDATION
22592	TASK_RESULT	by 1efd24fe (accepted)