Watch an orca ram into a sunfish so hard it explodes 56%

By Maria Temming71%

7/22/2026, 9:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Appeal to Authority, and False Dilemma, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 30.2% saturation with 111 hits. Analysis detected 873 faulty-reasoning hits from 368 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 53.3% and a BS Rank of 56% (9,765 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 55.40% of the article peer group.

Orcas have been known to slap around stingrays, punt seals into the air and otherwise play with their food. 
But killer whales don’t just toy with live prey. 
Some also seem to enjoy destroying the carcasses of their kills like piñs. 
Scientists documented this brutal activity among orcas (Orcinus orca) in the Gulf of California in 2024 and 2025. 
In both cases, one adult orca held a dead sharp-tail sunfish (Masturus lanceolatus) steady while another slammed into it with enough force to smash the sunfish into smithereens. 
Orcas might pulverize sunfish to help feed their young  or they might just find it entertaining, researchers report July 23 in Frontiers in Ethology. 
“I was absolutely gobsmacked” by this behavior, says Marianne Nyegaard, a marine biologist at Auckland Museum in New Zealand who was not involved in the work. 
She’d seen a couple videos of orcas battering sunfish on social media before the new paper did a deep dive on this phenomenon. 
“I thought it was the coolest thing I had ever seen,” she says. 
Nyegaard is not necessarily surprised that orcas have come up with such a creative strategy to dispatch sharp-tail sunfish, which can get up to a few meters long. 
“Orcas will do all sorts of things,” she says. 
“They are so clever at figuring out how to hunt and deal with a ton of different prey types.” 
That hunting is often a team sport, as when orcas band together to ambush blue whales or collectively make waves to knock penguins off ice. 
Orcas most likely annihilate sunfish this way to help feed their young, says Francesca Pancaldi, a marine biologist not involved in the work. 
After one of the sunfish explosions reported in the paper, she notes, a young orca began feeding on the small bits of carnage. 
But that may not be the only reason for this practice, adds Pancaldi, of the marine science center in La Paz associated with Mexico’s Instituto Politécnico Nacional. 
“Killer whales are highly social animals, and a behavior can simultaneously provide nutritional benefits, reinforce social bonds and serve as an opportunity for younger individuals to learn hunting techniques.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.3%Maria Temming: 2.1%Science News: 2.6%Confirmation Bias6.3%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 1.1%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 30.2%Maria Temming: 13.9%Science News: 2.6%Availability Heuristic30.2%This article: 5.2%Maria Temming: 1.7%Science News: 1.5%Representativeness Heuristic5.2%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Maria Temming: 0.8%Science News: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias2.4%This article: 5.4%Maria Temming: 1.8%Science News: 4.1%Framing Effect5.4%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 7.6%Maria Temming: 2.5%Science News: 0.4%Status Quo Bias7.6%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 11.4%Maria Temming: 3.8%Science News: 4.0%Optimism Bias11.4%This article: 6.8%Maria Temming: 2.3%Science News: 1.5%Pessimism Bias6.8%This article: 13.6%Maria Temming: 10.7%Science News: 4.1%Negativity Bias13.6%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Maria Temming: 1.7%Science News: 1.3%Halo Effect5.2%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.3%Maria Temming: 4.2%Science News: 1.0%Recency Bias6.3%This article: 4.9%Maria Temming: 1.6%Science News: 0.3%Primacy Effect4.9%This article: 7.3%Maria Temming: 2.4%Science News: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias7.3%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 16.3%Maria Temming: 7.5%Science News: 4.4%Appeal to Authority16.3%This article: 15.5%Maria Temming: 7.4%Science News: 1.2%False Dilemma15.5%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 7.6%Maria Temming: 3.7%Science News: 3.9%Hasty Generalization7.6%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 6.5%Maria Temming: 2.2%Science News: 2.5%Appeal to Emotion6.5%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 6.3%Maria Temming: 2.1%Science News: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.3%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 7.3%Maria Temming: 2.4%Science News: 0.5%Burden of Proof7.3%This article: 7.9%Maria Temming: 2.6%Science News: 0.3%Appeal to Nature7.9%This article: 7.9%Maria Temming: 2.6%Science News: 0.3%Composition/Division7.9%This article: 27.2%Maria Temming: 11.1%Science News: 1.2%Anecdotal27.2%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.7%Maria Temming: 2.9%Science News: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.7%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.1%Maria Temming: 2.4%Science News: 0.7%Unattributed Quote7.1%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.6%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 6.5%Maria Temming: 7.3%Science News: 2.6%Biased Writer Voice6.5%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.9%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maria Temming: 0.0%Science News: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

368 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers60%attributed speech148writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageMarianne Nyegaard • 26 words • 100.0% coverageMarianne Nyegaard • 23 words • 0.0% coverageMarianne Nyegaard • 13 words • 0.0% coverageMarianne Nyegaard • 28 words • 0.0% coverageMarianne Nyegaard • 9 words • 0.0% coverageMarianne Nyegaard • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageFrancesca Pancaldi • 23 words • 0.0% coverageFrancesca Pancaldi • 23 words • 0.0% coverageFrancesca Pancaldi • 27 words • 0.0% coverageFrancesca Pancaldi • 29 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Francesca Pancaldi

100%flagged-word coverage
102 attributed words46% of attributed speech83% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Biased Writer Voice-16.2 ptsWriter: 16.2%Francesca Pancaldi: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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