Hazardous wildfire smoke pollutes Michigan’s air 23%

By Pat Batcheller43%

7/16/2026, 1:54:15 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Indoctrination, Appeal to Authority, and Loss Aversion, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 14.9% saturation with 58 hits. Analysis detected 463 faulty-reasoning hits from 388 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 36.3% and a BS Rank of 23% (16,372 of 21,203 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 77.20% of the article peer group.

If the heat doesn’t get you, the foul air might. 
Wildfire smoke is making it hard to breathe in metro Detroit. 
The Environmental Protection Agency recommends staying indoors because of the conditions outdoors. 
The EPA’s air quality index measures pollutants such as ozone, dust, and fine particles. 
The primary pollutant in Detroit is particulate matter that is 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter. 
An index of 0 to 50 is considered good. 
Anything over 300 is hazardous. 
The AirNow website showed AQIs over 500 for PM 2.5 as of 9:00 a.m. 
EDT. 
Where’s it coming from? 
The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy has issued an air quality alert for the entire state. 
EGLE says the smoke is coming from wildfires in Canada and Minnesota. 
Corey Behnke is a meteorologist at the National Weather Service office in White Lake Township. 
He says a shift in the jet stream is responsible. 
“The jet stream that was confined to northern Canada earlier this week is now pushed down in the northern Great Lakes, just over northern Lake Huron,” he says. 
“This jet stream is bringing well organized northwest winds to the region.” 
Wildfire smoke clouds Midtown Detroit Metro Detroit was already dealing with heat and humidity before the smoke arrived. 
Behnke says the high pressure system responsible for the hot weather is starting to weaken. 
But that’s adding to the smoke problem. 
“As that breaks down, now we’re starting to see greater mixing throughout the atmosphere and is helping transport that smoke down to the surface,” he says. 
Behnke says the smoke could linger through Friday before spotty rain and milder temperatures move in for the weekend. 
“There will be some rain chances beginning Friday afternoon, and then we could see rain chances again Saturday afternoon,” he says. 
“No widespread rain across the region, but definitely some chances for some showers and thunderstorms.” 
The forecast calls for highs in the mid-80s Saturday and Sunday. 
EGLE recommends these steps to protect yourself from smoke: 
Stay indoors and avoid strenuous activities. 
Wear an N-95 mask if you must be outside. 
Run forced air systems on “fan” or “cooling.” 
Set window air conditioners to “recirculate.” 
Limit activities that create indoor pollution such as frying foods. 
Limit outdoor activities such as campfires and using gas-powered vehicles. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.6%Pat Batcheller: 2.1%WDET: 1.7%Confirmation Bias4.6%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.5%WDET: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%Pat Batcheller: 1.9%WDET: 2.3%Availability Heuristic2.6%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 1.7%WDET: 0.2%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 4.9%Pat Batcheller: 1.3%WDET: 1.1%Overconfidence Bias4.9%This article: 2.3%Pat Batcheller: 1.9%WDET: 4.6%Framing Effect2.3%This article: 11.3%Pat Batcheller: 1.6%WDET: 1.0%Loss Aversion11.3%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 1.7%WDET: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.6%WDET: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 3.9%WDET: 3.2%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%Pat Batcheller: 1.5%WDET: 0.9%Pessimism Bias3.9%This article: 10.1%Pat Batcheller: 2.6%WDET: 3.4%Negativity Bias10.1%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.7%WDET: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 5.2%WDET: 5.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 8.5%Pat Batcheller: 1.2%WDET: 0.9%Recency Bias8.5%This article: 1.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.5%WDET: 0.3%Primacy Effect1.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.9%Pat Batcheller: 4.2%WDET: 3.2%Appeal to Authority11.9%This article: 2.6%Pat Batcheller: 1.4%WDET: 1.0%False Dilemma2.6%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.7%WDET: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 3.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 2.6%Pat Batcheller: 4.7%WDET: 4.8%Appeal to Emotion2.6%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 14.9%Pat Batcheller: 3.3%WDET: 1.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)14.9%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.8%Pat Batcheller: 0.4%WDET: 1.9%Anecdotal2.8%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.5%Pat Batcheller: 1.7%WDET: 1.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.5%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.7%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 10.3%Pat Batcheller: 2.1%WDET: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection10.3%This article: 1.5%Pat Batcheller: 1.8%WDET: 4.0%Biased Writer Voice1.5%This article: 14.9%Pat Batcheller: 10.3%WDET: 2.7%Indoctrination14.9%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Pat Batcheller: 0.0%WDET: 6.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

388 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers67%attributed speech127writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageEnvironmental Protection Agency • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageAirNow website • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageMichigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy • 19 words • 0.0% coverageEGLE • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageCorey Behnke • 10 words • 0.0% coverageCorey Behnke • 28 words • 100.0% coverageCorey Behnke • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageCorey Behnke • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageCorey Behnke • 26 words • 0.0% coverageCorey Behnke • 19 words • 0.0% coverageCorey Behnke • 21 words • 0.0% coverageCorey Behnke • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageEGLE • 9 words • 100.0% coverageEGLE • 6 words • 100.0% coverageEGLE • 9 words • 100.0% coverageEGLE • 8 words • 100.0% coverageEGLE • 6 words • 100.0% coverageEGLE • 10 words • 100.0% coverageEGLE • 10 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

EGLE

83%flagged-word coverage
70 attributed words27% of attributed speech67% writer coverage
0%42.5%85.0%Indoctrination+82.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%EGLE: 82.9%82.9%Biased Writer Voice-4.7 ptsWriter: 4.7%EGLE: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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