Gizmodo57%

11 Years After Historic Flyby, Scientists Discover Giant Landslides on Pluto 18%

By Passant Rabie29%

7/16/2026, 11:30:59 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Confirmation Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Representativeness Heuristic as the most egregious example at 17.3% saturation with 83 hits. Analysis detected 696 faulty-reasoning hits from 479 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 33.3% and a BS Rank of 18% (17,986 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 82.20% of the article peer group.

In July 2015, NASA’s New Horizons spacecraft gave us our first look at Pluto’s surface in spectacular detail. 
The rare encounter revealed a distant world with giant ice sheets, mountains, valleys, and terrains unlike any other seen in the solar system. 
By reexamining those iconic images, scientists believe they have found the first evidence of landslides occurring on the dwarf planet. 
In a new study published in the journal Icarus, a team of scientists report the detection of six massive landslides located within three impact craters on Pluto. 
This mass movement of material is common on Earth and has occasionally been found elsewhere in the solar system, but the recent discovery marks a first for Pluto and could help scientists learn more about what shapes icy worlds like it. 
Landslides happen when large amounts of rock, debris, or soil move down a slope, relocating material to a new place. 
They typically occur on Earth due to heavy rain, snowmelt, volcanic activity, and earthquakes. 
Landslides also take place elsewhere in the solar system, most commonly on the rocky world of Mars, as well as the dwarf planet Ceres and the asteroid Vesta. 
Scientists have long theorized that Pluto’s icy terrain and steep craters could host massive landslides, helping sculpt its landscape over time. 
Even Pluto’s largest moon, Charon, has shown signs of long-run-out landslides on its surface. 
Pluto, on the other hand, has kept its mass-wasting events under wraps. 
The scientists behind the new study scoured through old data collected by New Horizon’s Long-Range Reconnaissance Imager (LORRI), which captured high-resolution images of Pluto’s surface. 
They combined the images with topographic maps collected during the spacecraft’s flyby. 
In the images, six features on Pluto’s surface fit the profile of massive landslides. 
The largest of which stretches across 50 square miles (130 square kilometers), while the rest range in height from 3,937 to 4,921 feet (1,200 to 1,500 meters). 
Each landslide is located along the inner rim of an impact crater on Pluto. 
They appear as crescent-shaped features at the height of the crater’s walls with deposits of giant blocks of ice and debris found at the bottom of the crater floors. 
The recent discovery highlights one way through which the surface of Pluto may have been shaped and how similar icy objects could have evolved over time. 
"These observations provide direct evidence that gravitational slope processes contribute to shaping Pluto’s surface, and expand our understanding of the geomorphological activity on icy bodies in the Solar System," the researchers wrote in the paper. 
The scientists behind the study believe that Pluto may have more landslides on its surface, which do not appear in the available images from New Horizon’s flyby. 
Future missions to the icy world, however, could capture higher-resolution images and more detailed topographic data to reveal Pluto’s hidden landslides. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 13.2%Passant Rabie: 4.2%Gizmodo: 4.1%Confirmation Bias13.2%This article: 4.4%Passant Rabie: 0.9%Gizmodo: 1.4%Anchoring Bias4.4%This article: 2.9%Passant Rabie: 3.0%Gizmodo: 3.1%Availability Heuristic2.9%This article: 17.3%Passant Rabie: 1.5%Gizmodo: 1.5%Representativeness Heuristic17.3%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 1.1%Gizmodo: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 7.3%Passant Rabie: 4.4%Gizmodo: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias7.3%This article: 6.3%Passant Rabie: 4.7%Gizmodo: 5.5%Framing Effect6.3%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 14.6%Passant Rabie: 8.9%Gizmodo: 3.9%Optimism Bias14.6%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.1%Gizmodo: 2.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Passant Rabie: 1.1%Gizmodo: 7.5%Negativity Bias4.8%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.2%Gizmodo: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 2.9%Passant Rabie: 0.4%Gizmodo: 2.9%Halo Effect2.9%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.6%Passant Rabie: 1.2%Gizmodo: 1.6%Recency Bias5.6%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.2%Gizmodo: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.3%Gizmodo: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 1.0%Gizmodo: 1.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 12.9%Passant Rabie: 5.0%Gizmodo: 4.3%Appeal to Authority12.9%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.2%Gizmodo: 1.4%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.3%Gizmodo: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 12.7%Passant Rabie: 3.9%Gizmodo: 5.3%Hasty Generalization12.7%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.1%Gizmodo: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.9%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 2.9%Gizmodo: 4.9%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 7.3%Passant Rabie: 1.7%Gizmodo: 1.0%Begging the Question7.3%This article: 4.4%Passant Rabie: 2.8%Gizmodo: 3.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.4%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 5.6%Passant Rabie: 0.3%Gizmodo: 0.5%Burden of Proof5.6%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.5%Gizmodo: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 5.4%Passant Rabie: 0.4%Gizmodo: 0.3%Composition/Division5.4%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.4%Gizmodo: 2.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.9%Passant Rabie: 1.8%Gizmodo: 2.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.9%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.2%Gizmodo: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.3%Passant Rabie: 1.0%Gizmodo: 4.6%Unattributed Quote7.3%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 1.1%Gizmodo: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 7.3%Passant Rabie: 3.5%Gizmodo: 13.5%Biased Writer Voice7.3%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 1.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 1.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Passant Rabie: 0.2%Gizmodo: 3.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

479 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.