July 4 heat wave would've been 'virtually impossible' in 1776 51%

By Andrea Thompson73%

7/3/2026, 4:30:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Confirmation Bias, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21.4% saturation with 124 hits. Analysis detected 1,242 faulty-reasoning hits from 579 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 50.7% and a BS Rank of 51% (10,789 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 50.70% of the article peer group.

July is always the hottest month for the U.S., but Julys today are significantly hotter than they were when Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and the other Founding Fathers declared the U.S. an independent nation. 
The brutal heat wave smothering the eastern half of the country as it celebrates its 250th birthday is stark reminder of just how profoundly the climate has changed since the American Revolution. 
In that time the U.S. has warmed by about 3 degrees Fahrenheit—faster than the overall global average rise of 2.5 degrees F. 
That warming is driven by the greenhouse gases accumulating in the Earth’s atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels that began on a massive scale with another revolution, the Industrial one. 
In the mid-18th century, carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere were around 280 parts per million. 
This year they surpassed 430 ppm. 
And historically the U.S. has been the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter. 
The warming of the planet creates noticeable changes in the weather we experience every day, though it varies from place to place: some areas of the U.S. are warming faster than others; some are getting wetter; others are becoming drier. 
Winter snows have declined while downpours have increased, and the hurricanes that batter our shores are becoming stronger and causing larger floods. 
But as it’s summer, let’s look at how heat—with one of the clearest links to global warming —has changed. 
Summer has of course always been the warm season, and heat waves have always happened. 
But according to the temperature record going back to the late 1800s, one thing is clear: summer temperatures are higher across the country overall and heat waves last longer, are more intense and happen more frequently than in the past. 
The 50 largest U.S. cities experience twice as many heat waves they did in the 1980s. 
Take Philadelphia, where the Declaration of Independence was signed and the Constitution was ratified: the average July temperature there has risen by 4.4 degrees F just since 1970. 
And kids growing up there today experience four more heat waves every summer than their grandparents did. 
Back in the 1770s, there would have been roughly equal odds of setting records for heat or cold, but now heat records are twice as likely. 
The heat wave sending temperatures into the triple digits for this July Fourth weekend is a prime example of an event for which climate change has loaded the dice. 
Such heat and high humidity would have been “virtually impossible” when the U.S. was founded, according to scientists with the World Weather Attribution research group. 
“On America’s 250th birthday, our study gives a clear reality check,” WWA team member Theodore Keeping, extreme weather and wildfire researcher at Imperial College London said in statement about their analysis of the heat wave. 
Because heat is the deadliest weather phenomenon, authorities have warned those celebrating to take precautions—avoid being outside at the hottest times of day, stay in air conditioning as much as possible, and stay hydrated and aware of signs of heat illness. 
Climate scientists and environmental advocates say that the event underscores the urgent need to rein in emissions. 
“Climate change is here,” WWA researcher Friederike Otto, also of ICL, said in the press statement. 
“It’s already impacting the things we enjoy in our everyday lives, and it will continue to get worse the longer we drag out the inevitable transition to net zero emissions.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 15.9%Andrea Thompson: 7.1%Scientific American: 3.0%Confirmation Bias15.9%This article: 10.7%Andrea Thompson: 3.8%Scientific American: 0.9%Anchoring Bias10.7%This article: 2.9%Andrea Thompson: 2.7%Scientific American: 2.6%Availability Heuristic2.9%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 2.9%Scientific American: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 4.5%Andrea Thompson: 1.0%Scientific American: 0.4%Hindsight Bias4.5%This article: 3.8%Andrea Thompson: 2.0%Scientific American: 2.5%Overconfidence Bias3.8%This article: 13.8%Andrea Thompson: 11.9%Scientific American: 4.2%Framing Effect13.8%This article: 5.2%Andrea Thompson: 1.2%Scientific American: 0.3%Loss Aversion5.2%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 2.2%Scientific American: 3.0%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Andrea Thompson: 2.3%Scientific American: 1.1%Pessimism Bias5.2%This article: 21.4%Andrea Thompson: 7.5%Scientific American: 3.3%Negativity Bias21.4%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 2.5%Scientific American: 0.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 5.1%Scientific American: 0.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.8%Andrea Thompson: 2.5%Scientific American: 0.8%Recency Bias3.8%This article: 2.1%Andrea Thompson: 0.5%Scientific American: 0.2%Primacy Effect2.1%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 21.1%Andrea Thompson: 10.1%Scientific American: 4.3%Appeal to Authority21.1%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 1.2%Scientific American: 1.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 10.2%Andrea Thompson: 2.3%Scientific American: 0.8%Slippery Slope10.2%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.8%Andrea Thompson: 4.5%Scientific American: 4.1%Hasty Generalization2.8%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 13.6%Andrea Thompson: 7.0%Scientific American: 4.2%Appeal to Emotion13.6%This article: 12.1%Andrea Thompson: 3.8%Scientific American: 0.6%Begging the Question12.1%This article: 14.2%Andrea Thompson: 3.2%Scientific American: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)14.2%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.4%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 7.8%Andrea Thompson: 7.2%Scientific American: 1.0%Anecdotal7.8%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 1.2%Scientific American: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.1%Andrea Thompson: 1.6%Scientific American: 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.1%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.6%Andrea Thompson: 0.6%Scientific American: 0.3%Middle Ground2.6%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 11.4%Andrea Thompson: 3.2%Scientific American: 0.7%Unattributed Quote11.4%This article: 2.8%Andrea Thompson: 1.0%Scientific American: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection2.8%This article: 5.5%Andrea Thompson: 8.3%Scientific American: 4.3%Biased Writer Voice5.5%This article: 11.2%Andrea Thompson: 6.6%Scientific American: 1.8%Indoctrination11.2%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrea Thompson: 0.0%Scientific American: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 2.9%Andrea Thompson: 3.9%Scientific American: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.9%

579 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers28%attributed speech415writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWorld Weather Attribution research group • 25 words • 100.0% coverageTheodore Keeping • 35 words • 100.0% coverageauthorities • 41 words • 100.0% coverageClimate scientists and environmental advocates • 17 words • 100.0% coverageFriederike Otto • 16 words • 100.0% coverageFriederike Otto • 30 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Friederike Otto

100%flagged-word coverage
46 attributed words28% of attributed speech87% writer coverage
0%35.0%70.0%Indoctrination+65.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%Friederike Otto: 65.2%65.2%Quote-first Misdirection+34.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Friederike Otto: 34.8%34.8%Biased Writer Voice-7.7 ptsWriter: 7.7%Friederike Otto: 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.