In air we trust 78%

By Greg Maresca84%

7/16/2026, 12:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 36 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Negativity Bias, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 46.2% saturation with 285 hits. Analysis detected 1,582 faulty-reasoning hits from 617 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 69.8% and a BS Rank of 78% (4,617 of 20,514 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 77.50% of the article peer group.

Air conditioning is a great equalizer. 
The recent July heatwave on the east coast proved it again. 
More to the point: the American Southwest would not be what it is today without it. 
As great as the “air” is in many ways it has softened us. 
It turned a nation that once endured the summer's heat and discomfort into a people who panic when the thermostat creeps above 75. 
We scurry from our air-conditioned homes to our air-conditioned cars to our air-conditioned workplaces horrified to break a sweat. 
We have become a nation that flees from the slightest inconvenience retreating behind sealed windows and humming HVAC units convinced that comfort is a constitutional right. 
My cousin proved the exception over the recent Independence Day weekend. 
She endured in a four-story Brooklyn pre-World War II walk-up. 
In other words, no elevator and no air conditioning as the mercury reached triple digits. 
She is a septuagenarian who still works as a visiting nurse who can still endure a summer heat wave in a building that predates air conditioning itself. 
She didn’t complain. 
She didn’t melt. 
She didn’t demand a government program. 
She simply persevered the way Americans once did without question. 
Contrast that with the rest of us. 
We treat heat like an existential threat. 
We have forgotten that sweat is natural and how discomfort builds resilience and that the human body was designed to handle more than 75 degrees and filtered air. 
Windows stayed open unless it rained. 
Kids cooled off by running through fire hydrants and sprinklers. 
Waistlines were leaner and people healthier. 
Before air, the heat drove us outside and brought us together. 
Today? 
Most neighborhoods are sealed shut as we traded human connection for climate control. 
Congress once fled Washington every summer because the heat was unbearable. 
Legislators scattered and the nation benefited from the break. 
However, once the Capitol installed air in 1929, lawmakers stayed. 
As the late Sen. 
James Eastland of Mississippi once quipped, “We put in air conditioning, stayed year-round, and ruined America.” 
With comfort came more laws, more bureaucracy, and more government. 
Air also reshaped architecture. 
Homes built a century ago had high ceilings, cross ventilation and wide hallways that moved air naturally. 
Today’s houses assume you will never open a window. 
Commercial buildings used to have windows that opened; now they are sealed glass boxes that make us oblivious to the seasons. 
We have engineered nature out of daily life and toughness out of ourselves. 
By no means is air unnecessary as it saves lives protecting the elderly and those with respiratory issues. 
It makes modern life possible in places like Las Vegas, Phoenix and Miami. 
But it also seduces us. 
And very hard at that. 
It convinces us that discomfort is intolerable, sweating is a crisis and that the outdoors is something to be avoided unless the weather is perfect. 
We have become a nation that complains about humidity the way previous generations complained about walking uphill both ways. 
The rest of the world still treats air as a luxury. 
In India, people “sit in AC” as if it is an event not to be missed. 
In Europe, they pretend they do not need it even as they hide under misting systems and shade curtains. 
Air conditioning isn’t the problem. 
Our dependence on it is. 
We have built a culture that worships comfort and fears hardship. 
We have forgotten that resilience is forged in sweat, not in climate-controlled rooms. 
My cousin in New York didn’t panic. 
She lived through the heat the way millions once did with grit, patience, and acceptance that discomfort is part of life. 
I wasn’t surprised. 
After all, she's a Maresca. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.3%Greg Maresca: 6.7%American Thinker: 10.4%Confirmation Bias6.3%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.5%American Thinker: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.2%Greg Maresca: 2.6%American Thinker: 3.8%Availability Heuristic6.2%This article: 10.4%Greg Maresca: 1.7%American Thinker: 1.6%Representativeness Heuristic10.4%This article: 3.7%Greg Maresca: 0.5%American Thinker: 1.3%Hindsight Bias3.7%This article: 5.7%Greg Maresca: 1.4%American Thinker: 2.6%Overconfidence Bias5.7%This article: 1.5%Greg Maresca: 6.1%American Thinker: 7.0%Framing Effect1.5%This article: 2.1%Greg Maresca: 1.0%American Thinker: 0.6%Loss Aversion2.1%This article: 7.1%Greg Maresca: 5.7%American Thinker: 0.6%Status Quo Bias7.1%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 1.5%Greg Maresca: 0.2%American Thinker: 1.6%Optimism Bias1.5%This article: 2.1%Greg Maresca: 4.1%American Thinker: 2.6%Pessimism Bias2.1%This article: 22.2%Greg Maresca: 12.8%American Thinker: 13.2%Negativity Bias22.2%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 1.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 3.2%American Thinker: 3.0%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Greg Maresca: 1.8%American Thinker: 4.0%In-Group Bias1.1%This article: 11.7%Greg Maresca: 2.6%American Thinker: 5.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias11.7%This article: 1.8%Greg Maresca: 0.9%American Thinker: 2.7%Halo Effect1.8%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.3%American Thinker: 0.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.4%Greg Maresca: 0.5%American Thinker: 1.3%Recency Bias4.4%This article: 4.7%Greg Maresca: 0.9%American Thinker: 0.7%Primacy Effect4.7%This article: 2.1%Greg Maresca: 0.3%American Thinker: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias2.1%This article: 2.1%Greg Maresca: 0.6%American Thinker: 5.8%Ad Hominem2.1%This article: 7.8%Greg Maresca: 2.9%American Thinker: 4.2%Straw Man7.8%This article: 2.6%Greg Maresca: 2.5%American Thinker: 4.7%Appeal to Authority2.6%This article: 10.9%Greg Maresca: 3.9%American Thinker: 4.7%False Dilemma10.9%This article: 6.3%Greg Maresca: 3.0%American Thinker: 3.3%Slippery Slope6.3%This article: 4.5%Greg Maresca: 1.0%American Thinker: 0.3%Circular Reasoning4.5%This article: 46.2%Greg Maresca: 27.3%American Thinker: 17.2%Hasty Generalization46.2%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 1.2%American Thinker: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 12.5%Greg Maresca: 4.9%American Thinker: 8.6%Appeal to Emotion12.5%This article: 2.9%Greg Maresca: 3.3%American Thinker: 2.7%Begging the Question2.9%This article: 16.5%Greg Maresca: 4.9%American Thinker: 3.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)16.5%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 1.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 6.6%Greg Maresca: 2.8%American Thinker: 0.6%Appeal to Nature6.6%This article: 3.4%Greg Maresca: 0.4%American Thinker: 0.8%Composition/Division3.4%This article: 25.6%Greg Maresca: 6.2%American Thinker: 3.7%Anecdotal25.6%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.5%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.5%Greg Maresca: 3.5%American Thinker: 2.1%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.5%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.5%Greg Maresca: 0.1%American Thinker: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.5%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.8%Greg Maresca: 0.2%American Thinker: 0.7%Genetic Fallacy0.8%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 1.6%American Thinker: 3.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 2.6%Greg Maresca: 1.4%American Thinker: 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection2.6%This article: 2.6%Greg Maresca: 21.3%American Thinker: 23.5%Biased Writer Voice2.6%This article: 2.9%Greg Maresca: 4.8%American Thinker: 5.7%Indoctrination2.9%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.0%American Thinker: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.5%American Thinker: 15.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Greg Maresca: 0.4%American Thinker: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

617 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker2.6%attributed speech601writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageJames Eastland • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

James Eastland

100%flagged-word coverage
16 attributed words100% of attributed speech99% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%James Eastland: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%James Eastland: 100.0%100.0%Indoctrination-3.0 ptsWriter: 3.0%James Eastland: 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.