Trace a claim back to what it rests on

Work backwards from this claim to what it actually rests on.

1. **State the claim exactly as given**
2. **Follow the chain:** the answer cites a page / ***that page cites what?*** / and so on — ***until you reach something that is evidence rather than a restatement***
3. **Say how many steps** — ***each step is a place a qualifier got dropped or a number got rounded***
4. **Identify what sits at the end:**
   - **A study, a record, a dataset** — ***name what would need checking about it***
   - **An estimate, a projection, a model** — ***and whose***
   - **An assertion by someone with a position**
   - ***Nothing.* **The chain circles: pages citing each other. Say so** — **this is more common than it looks and it produces claims everyone repeats**
5. **What changed along the chain** — ***scope, population, certainty, units, a condition***

**Then:**
- ***The weakest link*** — where the claim is most likely to have gone wrong
- **What to open and read myself** — ***one thing, the one that matters***
- **Whether the claim survives if the chain does not hold**

⚠️ ***Do not follow the chain from memory. Work only from what is in the answer I pasted*** — **where it does not say what a source cites, say that it does not say.** ***Do not confirm that the endpoint says what is claimed.***