Climate scientists have predicted greater flooding in Texas for decades. It’s happening now 60%

By Mose Buchele0% KUT18%

7/20/2026, 5:12:47 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Overconfidence Bias, Anchoring Bias, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 48.2% saturation with 205 hits. Analysis detected 897 faulty-reasoning hits from 425 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 56.2% and a BS Rank of 60% (8,772 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 59.90% of the article peer group.

One of the shocking things about the storms that hit Texas last week is that rainfall of similar devastating strength struck almost exactly a year ago in many of the same places. 
That tragic repetition may be less of a surprise to those who follow climate science. 
While it is tricky to attribute specific rain events to climate change, experts say they know enough about how the warming atmosphere and warming oceans affect precipitation to recognize trends. 
“We’re not saying that our warming climate caused these floods this year, last year” Shel Winkley, chief meteorologist at Climate Central, told Texas Public Radio's *The Source*. 
“But we understand how it’s making it more likely, more frequent.” 
A warming atmosphere, for example, increases extreme rainfall risk because warm air holds more moisture that can lead to about 4% more rainfall for every one degree warmer the air becomes, Winkley said. 
In a 2024 report, the Office of the State Climatologist of Texas noted that Texas had already seen up to a 15% increase in extreme rainstorms this century from the latter part of last century. 
That report predicted a 20% increase in the frequency of those storms by 2036 that would more than double the previous odds of extreme rainfall happening. 
The same report found that increased rainfall will contribute to a 10% to 15% increase in flooding in urban areas, potentially doubling the risk of floods from last century. 
Ocean temperatures, made warmer through heat-trapping pollution, also contribute to stronger storms. 
“Right now the Gulf of Mexico, even by July standards, is above average,” Winkley said. 
“A warmer ocean can allow for more evaporation, more rain making moisture.” 
None of those ingredients assure greater rainfall, but when they run into the right weather conditions, they do make the rainfall worse. 
Those weather conditions were in place last week. 
Typically heavy rains are kept at bay in Texas summers by an area of warmer air in the upper atmosphere sometimes called a “cap.” 
Bob Fogarty, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service in New Braunfels, said that cap stops the warmer, humid air blowing in from the gulf to rise up and create rain. 
But, Fogarty said, ahead of last week’s storms, a disturbance in the upper atmosphere “took the cap away.” 
“Because the air was so moist it produced very heavy rainfall,” he said. 
“The moisture levels were unusually high for this time of year, and when it rained it rained a lot.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 12.5%Mose Buchele: 7.3%Houston Public Media: 1.7%Confirmation Bias12.5%This article: 15.1%Mose Buchele: 9.8%Houston Public Media: 1.1%Anchoring Bias15.1%This article: 11.8%Mose Buchele: 6.4%Houston Public Media: 2.7%Availability Heuristic11.8%This article: 5.6%Mose Buchele: 1.9%Houston Public Media: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic5.6%This article: 10.6%Mose Buchele: 3.5%Houston Public Media: 0.5%Hindsight Bias10.6%This article: 25.4%Mose Buchele: 8.5%Houston Public Media: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias25.4%This article: 4.2%Mose Buchele: 2.4%Houston Public Media: 4.9%Framing Effect4.2%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 6.1%Mose Buchele: 2.0%Houston Public Media: 2.3%Optimism Bias6.1%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 7.5%Mose Buchele: 7.3%Houston Public Media: 4.7%Negativity Bias7.5%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Mose Buchele: 2.4%Houston Public Media: 1.6%In-Group Bias3.5%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 1.5%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 11.8%Mose Buchele: 6.8%Houston Public Media: 1.2%Recency Bias11.8%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 48.2%Mose Buchele: 18.4%Houston Public Media: 3.5%Appeal to Authority48.2%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 2.0%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 3.9%Houston Public Media: 4.5%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 2.8%Mose Buchele: 0.9%Houston Public Media: 0.8%Begging the Question2.8%This article: 8.9%Mose Buchele: 3.2%Houston Public Media: 1.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.9%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 7.1%Mose Buchele: 2.4%Houston Public Media: 0.3%Burden of Proof7.1%This article: 2.8%Mose Buchele: 0.9%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Appeal to Nature2.8%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 7.5%Mose Buchele: 5.0%Houston Public Media: 1.3%Anecdotal7.5%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.5%Mose Buchele: 1.5%Houston Public Media: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.5%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.4%Mose Buchele: 2.1%Houston Public Media: 1.1%Unattributed Quote6.4%This article: 6.4%Mose Buchele: 2.1%Houston Public Media: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection6.4%This article: 2.4%Mose Buchele: 4.5%Houston Public Media: 1.1%Biased Writer Voice2.4%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 1.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mose Buchele: 0.0%Houston Public Media: 0.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

425 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers63%attributed speech156writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageShel Winkley • 27 words • 100.0% coverageShel Winkley • 11 words • 0.0% coverageShel Winkley • 33 words • 0.0% coverageOffice of the State Climatologist of Texas • 35 words • 0.0% coverageOffice of the State Climatologist of Texas • 26 words • 0.0% coverageOffice of the State Climatologist of Texas • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageShel Winkley • 15 words • 0.0% coverageShel Winkley • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageBob Fogarty • 31 words • 0.0% coverageBob Fogarty • 18 words • 0.0% coverageBob Fogarty • 13 words • 0.0% coverageBob Fogarty • 19 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
90 attributed words33% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Biased Writer Voice-6.4 ptsWriter: 6.4%Office of the State Climatologist of Texas: 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.