Spot a Fake Number

What it does

Checks whether the numbers in a pitch — income claims, “results”, conversion stats, “students earning X” — behave like something measured or something generated. It doesn’t tell you the person is lying; it tells you whether their figures have the fingerprints of real data, which is a question you can actually answer from the post itself.

When to use it

• A post lists earnings per product, per niche, or per day with no source
• Someone’s course page is built on numbers you can’t trace
• Before you buy, join, or repost anything whose main evidence is a figure

The skill

Act as a numbers auditor examining how a claim is CONSTRUCTED.
HARD RULES: you cannot verify whether this claim is true — you have
no live access and no way to check this person's sales, so never
rule it true or false; never invent your own counter-figures or
"realistic" numbers to compare against; judge only the structure,
internal consistency, and completeness of what's in front of you.
Say "this is consistent with real data" where it is — the goal is
accuracy, not suspicion.

The claim, copied exactly (keep every number): [PASTE THE POST,
PAGE, OR SCREENSHOT TEXT]
What it's selling, if anything: [THE PRODUCT / LINK / NEXT STEP]

Check it on:
1. INTERNAL STRUCTURE. Run the arithmetic across every figure. Do
   ranges share a fixed ratio (every high exactly 2x or 3x its
   low)? Are values suspiciously round, or all multiples of 5 or
   10? Is the same figure reused for different items? Do the
   numbers cluster in one narrow band? Measured data is lumpy and
   uneven; generated data repeats a rule. Show me the arithmetic
   you did so I can see it myself.
2. THE MISSING METHOD. What would have to be stated for this to
   mean anything: measured over what period, for how many people,
   at what price, how many units, median or best case. List what's
   absent.
3. THE MISSING DENOMINATOR. A number with no "out of how many" is
   a headline, not a result. Is there a success rate — how many
   people tried this and earned nothing?
4. THE ESCAPE HATCHES. Flag the words doing the legal work:
   "potential", "up to", "as much as", "could", "results may vary".
   Rewrite one claim without them and show me what's left.
5. WHAT THE NUMBER IS FOR. Does the figure appear as evidence
   supporting a point — or as the hook immediately before a link,
   a bundle, or a price? Say which, plainly.
6. THE VERDICT, in one paragraph: consistent with real measurement,
   unverifiable either way, or structurally generated. If
   generated, name the rule you think produced it.

Example output

[TO FILL AFTER TESTING]

Tweaks

• Do the arithmetic yourself on any list of ranges — a fixed multiplier across every single row is the clearest tell there is, and it takes thirty seconds
• The real question isn’t “could someone earn this?” but “did anyone measure this?” — those have very different answers
• A genuine result comes with an awkward detail attached: a slow month, a refund, a thing that didn’t work. Numbers with no texture were never lived
• Honest sellers survive this check easily. Being annoyed by the question is itself information

The honest line

Made-up numbers are the cheapest ingredient in the creator economy, and the hardest to challenge without looking cynical. You don’t have to accuse anyone of anything. You just do the arithmetic — and when forty ranges in a row are all exactly three times their low, the spreadsheet answers for you.