Wildfire on Mount Diablo sends smoke above East Bay hills 11%

By Lucy Hodgman69% Anthony Edwards0%

7/17/2026, 4:11:55 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Anchoring Bias, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 14.8% saturation with 34 hits. Analysis detected 190 faulty-reasoning hits from 230 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 27.8% and a BS Rank of 11% (19,546 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 89.30% of the article peer group.

Firefighters were battling a wildfire on Mount Diablo that had consumed about 51 acres in Contra Costa County by late Friday afternoon, authorities said. 
Smoke from the wildfire could be seen rising above the East Bay hills from San Francisco. 
The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District responded to the three-alarm fire around 2:45 p.m. 
Friday, according to Capt. 
Ted Leach. 
No evacuation orders were in place by 3:30 p.m. and Leach was unaware of any structures threatened by the fire. 
Cal Fire designated the blaze the Morgan Fire on Friday, estimating that it began near Morgan Territory Road and Marsh Creek Road  close to the popular North Peak trailhead. 
A fire, also named the Morgan Fire, burned more than 3,700 acres in the East Bay in 2013. 
Temperatures were in the low to mid-80s Friday afternoon on the east side of Mount Diablo, near where the fire started. 
Conditions have been warm in Clayton, near the fire, with nights above 70 degrees earlier this week. 
That warm, dry weather made vegetation far more flammable. 
Afternoon wind gusts were picking up, reaching up to 15 miles per hour, although winds remained weak near the ground. 
Cal Fire initially reported that the fire had consumed as many as 125 acres, but decreased that estimate later Friday afternoon, citing “better mapping.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 4.7%San Francisco Chronicle: 2.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 10.4%Lucy Hodgman: 3.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.8%Anchoring Bias10.4%This article: 14.8%Lucy Hodgman: 11.2%San Francisco Chronicle: 3.2%Availability Heuristic14.8%This article: 7.8%Lucy Hodgman: 2.6%San Francisco Chronicle: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic7.8%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 4.3%Lucy Hodgman: 4.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 5.5%Framing Effect4.3%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 8.7%Lucy Hodgman: 3.9%San Francisco Chronicle: 1.2%Status Quo Bias8.7%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 1.7%San Francisco Chronicle: 2.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 1.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 6.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 6.4%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 1.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 4.1%San Francisco Chronicle: 2.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.4%Lucy Hodgman: 2.7%San Francisco Chronicle: 1.0%Recency Bias7.4%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 13.0%Lucy Hodgman: 10.3%San Francisco Chronicle: 4.7%Appeal to Authority13.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 1.0%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 3.5%San Francisco Chronicle: 3.9%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 2.6%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 5.8%San Francisco Chronicle: 4.1%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 11.7%Lucy Hodgman: 3.4%San Francisco Chronicle: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)11.7%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.8%San Francisco Chronicle: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.6%Lucy Hodgman: 0.4%San Francisco Chronicle: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.6%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.7%Lucy Hodgman: 0.2%San Francisco Chronicle: 1.0%Unattributed Quote1.7%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 5.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 4.4%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 2.5%San Francisco Chronicle: 1.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lucy Hodgman: 0.0%San Francisco Chronicle: 2.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

230 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers41%attributed speech135writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageContra Costa County Fire Protection District • 15 words • 0.0% coverageCapt. Ted Leach • 4 words • 100.0% coverageCapt. Ted Leach • 2 words • 0.0% coverageCapt. Ted Leach • 20 words • 0.0% coverageCal Fire • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageCal Fire • 24 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Capt. Ted Leach

100%flagged-word coverage
26 attributed words27% of attributed speech52% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Unattributed Quote+15.4 ptsWriter: 0.0%Capt. Ted Leach: 15.4%15.4%

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.