Crews make progress on Grand fire in Chino Hills; evacuations lifted ⁠1%

By Clara Harter⁠64%

5/13/2026, 9:11:35 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 14 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Loss Aversion, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 17.6% saturation with 45 hits. Analysis detected 379 faulty-reasoning hits from 255 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠1% (21,829 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 99.70% of the article peer group.

Evacuation orders were lifted late Wednesday as crews made progress in battling the Grand fire in Chino Hills, fire officials said. 
The vegetation fire ignited near Grand Avenue Park around 7 p.m. 
An hour later, the blaze had burned 30 acres, prompting officials to urge residents living on Mill Stream Drive, Falling Star Lane, Valley View Lane and Sweet Grass Lane to leave their homes immediately. 
One firefighter suffered a minor injury and was transported to a hospital, according to Cal Fire. 
Chino Valley Fire reported shortly before 8 p.m. that the blaze had the potential to spread to 200 acres and was threatening structures. 
Ground crews and water-dropping helicopters worked to get a handle on the blaze. 
By 9:30 p.m., officials reported that the fire was holding at 30 acres amid more favorable conditions — cooler nighttime temperatures and higher humidity. 
Around 10 p.m., all evacuation orders and warnings had been lifted and all aircraft released, officials said. 
Grand Avenue between Grand Avenue Park and the city limit remained closed until further notice. 
The National Weather Service warned Wednesday that moderate to locally strong winds and low humidity would elevate the risk of fire in inland areas of L.A. 
County this week. 
Chino Hills is just to the east of the L.A. 
County border. 
The highest risk of fire weather is currently expected on Saturday and Sunday, when winds of 15 to 30 mph are expected, with isolated gusts up to 50 mph. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 17.6%Clara Harter: 4.3%Daily Pilot: 2.9%Confirmation Bias17.6%This article: 13.3%Clara Harter: 1.5%Daily Pilot: 1.2%Anchoring Bias13.3%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 5.4%Daily Pilot: 3.5%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.1%Daily Pilot: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 9.4%Clara Harter: 0.5%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Hindsight Bias9.4%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.8%Daily Pilot: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 9.8%Daily Pilot: 7.5%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 13.3%Clara Harter: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Loss Aversion13.3%This article: 6.7%Clara Harter: 1.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Status Quo Bias6.7%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.1%Clara Harter: 1.8%Daily Pilot: 3.6%Optimism Bias5.1%This article: 9.0%Clara Harter: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 1.4%Pessimism Bias9.0%This article: 10.2%Clara Harter: 11.8%Daily Pilot: 7.8%Negativity Bias10.2%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.0%Daily Pilot: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.5%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.2%Daily Pilot: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.7%Daily Pilot: 5.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.5%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 11.4%Clara Harter: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 1.3%Recency Bias11.4%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.4%Daily Pilot: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 10.2%Clara Harter: 5.2%Daily Pilot: 4.9%Appeal to Authority10.2%This article: 6.7%Clara Harter: 0.9%Daily Pilot: 1.2%False Dilemma6.7%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.3%Daily Pilot: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 2.4%Daily Pilot: 4.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.4%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.4%Daily Pilot: 1.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 8.6%Daily Pilot: 5.7%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 13.3%Clara Harter: 2.1%Daily Pilot: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)13.3%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.0%Daily Pilot: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.2%Daily Pilot: 2.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 9.0%Clara Harter: 1.2%Daily Pilot: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)9.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.4%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 2.5%Daily Pilot: 1.3%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.9%Daily Pilot: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 13.3%Clara Harter: 4.1%Daily Pilot: 6.0%Biased Writer Voice13.3%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.1%Daily Pilot: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.8%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 1.5%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Clara Harter: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 4.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

255 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers25%attributed speech190writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageCal Fire • 16 words • 0.0% coverageChino Valley Fire • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageNational Weather Service • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
26 attributed words40% of attributed speech73% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Biased Writer Voice-17.9 ptsWriter: 17.9%National Weather Service: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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