Enter the evidence based activist, the factivist.

Or just facts, for starters.

This story is based on facts.

His testimony stands on facts.

His theory is based on fact.

Her theory is based on facts.

There's a mistake in the bill.

There is an error in this sentence.

There is a mistake in this sentence.

There is a mistake in the sentence.

There's a mistake in this sentence.

In fact, it's a mistake.

There is an error in the sentence.

His conclusion is based on these facts.

His theory is based on many facts.

It s a mistake.

read error

write error

My mistake.

It's a mistake.

This is a mistake.

That's a mistake.

That is a mistake.

This is an error.

Is this a mistake?

There's a mistake here.

Where is the mistake?

Where's the mistake?

In hindsight, Greenspan was wrong.

There is an error in this sentence.

There is a mistake in this sentence.

This sentence contains an error.

There is a mistake in the sentence.

There might have been a miscalculation.

It was a miscalculation.

Here is a beauty parlor scene (based on a true story).

It is said to be effective, evidence based, and cheap to implement.

So, in talking about values we are talking about facts.

Such opposition is not based on scientific evidence.

What went wrong?

Every mistake is an opportunity in jazz.

There is something fundamentally wrong with EU policy.

Warning

There is, however, a problem with their argument.

There's a grammatical mistake in that clause.