Fact-Check Any Claim. Instantly.

Real sources. Independent analysis. Human review.

Claim analyzed

“The full moon causes increased unusual human behavior and events.”

The Conclusion

The claim is
False
3/10

Executive Summary

The claim is false. Multiple high-quality studies directly testing unusual behaviors like crime and hospital admissions find no lunar associations. Supporting evidence relies on outdated research, modest sleep effects that don't establish behavioral causation, and cherry-picked correlations while ignoring decades of contradictory meta-analyses.

Warnings

  • The claim commits a composition fallacy by assuming sleep changes automatically cause unusual behavior without establishing that causal link
  • Supporting evidence cherry-picks correlations while ignoring multiple direct studies of crime, hospital admissions, and emergency calls that found no lunar associations
  • Decades of meta-analyses spanning 30+ years have consistently disproven lunar behavioral effects, contradicting the claim's core premise
Full Analysis

The Claim

How we interpreted the user input

Intent

User wants to know if there is scientific evidence supporting the belief that full moons influence human behavior and cause more unusual events to occur.

Testable Claim

The user's input, neutralized and hardened into a testable hypothesis

“The full moon causes increased unusual human behavior and events.”

The Research

What we found online

Summary of Findings

13 sources used 5 supporting 7 refuting 1 neutral

All sources are listed in the Sources section at the end of this report.

The Debate

The for and against arguments

P
Proponent Argues TRUE

Source 2 (PubMed/NIH) demonstrates that hospital admissions for cardiovascular events, hemorrhage, and other conditions correlate with moon phases, while traffic accidents, crimes, and suicides appear influenced by the lunar cycle, providing authoritative medical evidence for lunar effects on human behavior. Source 4 (Cleveland Clinic Health Essentials) confirms measurable physiological changes during full moons, with people experiencing 30% less deep sleep and 20 minutes less total sleep along with decreased melatonin levels, establishing a clear biological mechanism through which lunar cycles affect human behavior and well-being.

O
Opponent Rebuttal

You're treating Source 2 (PubMed/NIH) as “demonstrative,” but its own wording is cautious—events only “correlated” or “appeared” influenced—and you never show causation or rule out confounders, which is exactly why higher-quality direct tests of “unusual events” like serious violence and reported crime find no association (Source 1, Comprehensive Psychiatry; Source 3, Roger Williams University Student Journal of Sociology; Source 7, Utah Valley University). And even if Source 4 (Cleveland Clinic Health Essentials) is right about modest sleep/melatonin shifts, you commit a non sequitur by leaping from a physiological correlate to the motion's claim that the full moon “causes increased unusual human behavior and events,” a claim the broader summaries and reviews in the brief say has essentially been disproven (Source 5, Popular Mechanics; Source 6, Healthline).

O
Opponent Argues FALSE

The claim that a full moon causes increased unusual human behavior is contradicted by higher-quality empirical studies finding no meaningful association with real-world “unusual events”: Source 1 (Comprehensive Psychiatry, 2009) reports no significant link between lunar phases and serious battery crimes (including a Fourier analysis), and Source 3 (Roger Williams University Student Journal of Sociology) and Source 7 (Utah Valley University) likewise find no lunar–crime correlation. The “supporting” evidence is either outdated and mechanistically speculative (Source 10 (PubMed, 1980) invoking “human tidal waves”), or is broad/ambiguous about causality and mixes heterogeneous outcomes (Source 2 (PubMed/NIH) says events only “appeared” influenced), while even popular summaries note the phenomenon has essentially been disproven (Source 5 (Popular Mechanics)) and reviews conclude full moons don't increase these behaviors (Source 6 (Healthline)).

P
Proponent Rebuttal

You cherry-pick crime studies while ignoring the broader physiological evidence from Source 4 (Cleveland Clinic Health Essentials) showing measurable 30% reduction in deep sleep and decreased melatonin during full moons, which establishes a concrete biological mechanism affecting human behavior beyond just criminal activity. Your dismissal of Source 2 (PubMed/NIH) as "ambiguous" fails to address that it documents correlations across multiple medical conditions including cardiovascular events and emergency admissions, representing a much wider scope of unusual human events than the narrow crime-focused studies you cite.

You'll need an account first

Create a free account to get exclusive early access and be the first to chat live with the Proponent and Opponent.

Live Chat is in closed beta

We're rolling this out to a small group first. Join the waitlist and we'll let you know as soon as your access is ready.

The Adjudication

How each panelist evaluated the evidence and arguments

Panelist 1 — The Source Auditor
Focus: Source Reliability & Independence
False
3/10

The most reliable sources (Source 1: Comprehensive Psychiatry with 0.9 authority score, Source 2: PubMed/NIH with 0.88 authority score, and Source 3: Roger Williams University with 0.85 authority score) provide contradictory evidence, but the highest-quality peer-reviewed studies specifically testing "unusual behavior and events" like crime and violence find no significant associations with lunar phases. While Source 2 mentions correlations with hospital admissions, it uses cautious language ("appeared to be influenced") and lacks the methodological rigor of controlled studies like Source 1's Fourier analysis that definitively found no lunar-crime relationship.

Weakest Sources

Source 10 (PubMed, 1980) is unreliable because it's 46 years old and proposes the scientifically unsupported mechanism of 'human tidal waves'Source 11 (IJIRT) is unreliable because it appears to be from a low-tier journal with unclear peer review standardsSource 13 (LLM Background Knowledge) is unreliable because it's not a primary source and lacks verifiable citations
Confidence: 8/10
Panelist 2 — The Logic Examiner
Focus: Inferential Soundness & Fallacies
False
3/10

The proponent commits a composition fallacy by treating sleep disruption (Source 4) as proof of "increased unusual human behavior and events," and conflates correlation with causation when citing Source 2's ambiguous "appeared to be influenced" language, while multiple direct tests of the claim's scope—crimes and emergency events—find no association (Sources 1, 3, 6, 7, 13). The opponent correctly identifies that the evidence logically refutes the claim: the supporting sources either show modest physiological effects that don't establish behavioral consequences, or use hedged language about correlation without demonstrating causation, whereas higher-quality studies directly testing unusual behaviors find no lunar effect, making the claim false based on the inferential chain from evidence to conclusion.

Logical Fallacies

Composition fallacy (Proponent): Assumes that because sleep is affected (Source 4), unusual behavior must increase—the whole does not follow from the partCorrelation-causation conflation (Proponent): Source 2's 'correlated' and 'appeared influenced' language is treated as proof of causation without controlling for confoundersCherry-picking (Proponent): Emphasizes three supporting sources while dismissing six refuting sources and meta-analyses showing no effectNon sequitur (Proponent's rebuttal): Leaps from 'biological mechanism' (sleep changes) to 'increased unusual human behavior and events' without bridging evidenceHasty generalization (Proponent): Generalizes from limited physiological data to broad claim about 'unusual human behavior and events' without scope-matching
Confidence: 8/10
Panelist 3 — The Context Analyst
Focus: Completeness & Framing
False
3/10

The claim omits critical context that undermines its truthfulness: (1) the supporting evidence cherry-picks ambiguous correlations from Source 2 (PubMed/NIH, date unknown) and a single sleep study (Source 4, Cleveland Clinic, 2013 data) while ignoring that multiple higher-quality direct tests of "unusual behavior and events" found no associations (Sources 1, 3, 6, 7 all refute crime/hospital admission increases), (2) Source 13 notes meta-analyses over 30 years have disproven the phenomenon, and Source 5 (Popular Mechanics) states it has "essentially been disproven," (3) the claim conflates a modest physiological sleep effect with causation of "increased unusual human behavior and events" without establishing that link, and (4) the one strongly supportive crime study (Source 10) is from 1980 and invokes a debunked "human tidal waves" mechanism. Once the full scientific consensus, the failure of direct behavioral tests, and the non sequitur from sleep changes to unusual events are considered, the claim's overall impression is fundamentally false.

Missing Context

Multiple meta-analyses spanning 30+ years have found no consistent evidence linking full moons to increased crime, hospital admissions, or unusual behavior (Source 13, Source 5)The strongest supporting crime study (Source 10) is from 1980 and relies on a scientifically implausible 'human tidal waves' gravitational mechanismDirect empirical tests of unusual events (crimes, hospital admissions, traffic accidents) consistently find no lunar association (Sources 1, 3, 6, 7)The sleep study (Source 4) shows only modest physiological changes (20 minutes less sleep, 30% less deep sleep) but does not establish causation of 'unusual behavior and events'Source 2's language is cautious ('appeared to be influenced,' 'correlated') and does not establish causation or control for confoundersOver 40% of hospital staff believe in lunar effects despite research disproving it, indicating a persistent confirmation bias (Source 5)
Confidence: 8/10

Adjudication Summary

All three evaluation axes scored consistently low (3/10), creating unanimous agreement. Source quality analysis found the most reliable studies (Comprehensive Psychiatry, PubMed/NIH) directly contradict the claim when testing actual unusual behaviors. Logic examination revealed composition fallacies—treating sleep disruption as proof of behavioral changes—and correlation-causation conflation. Context analysis exposed that decades of meta-analyses have disproven lunar behavioral effects, while supporting evidence cherry-picks ambiguous correlations and relies on a 46-year-old study with debunked mechanisms.

Consensus

The claim is
False
3/10
Confidence: 8/10 Unanimous

Sources

Sources used in the analysis