Vacant apartment clubhouse near Coldwater Creek to be demolished because of nuclear contamination 5%

By Sarah Fentem57%

5/8/2026, 8:50:32 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Framing Effect, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 34.8% saturation with 179 hits. Analysis detected 915 faulty-reasoning hits from 514 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 20.3% and a BS Rank of 5% (20,834 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 95.20% of the article peer group.

The U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers in St. 
Louis plans to demolish a clubhouse in a vacant Hazelwood apartment complex in north St. 
Louis County after radioactive material was found under the building. 
The building is in the floodplain of Coldwater Creek, a 19-mile waterway that was contaminated after improperly stored nuclear waste from the Manhattan Project leached into the surrounding land and water. 
As the creek flooded, the contamination spread to the creek’s banks and surrounding areas. 
A 2025 report on samples near the clubhouse found increased levels of an isotope of thorium, a radioactive element that's sometimes used as nuclear fuel, a spokesman for the Corps' St. 
Louis district said in an email. 
The demolition near North Hanley and Dunn Roads is part of the Corps’ ongoing efforts to clean up potentially dangerous waste originating from the manufacture of nuclear weapons decades ago. 
“We are following the data and taking the actions needed to advance remediation efforts along Coldwater Creek safely and effectively,” said Col. 
Andy Pannier, the St. 
Louis district commander, in a news release. 
“We will continue to prioritize the health and well-being of the community, guided by data-driven decisions, and keep the community informed throughout the process.” 
Taking the building down will allow workers to clean up radioactive material underground and further assess the contamination, officials said. 
No one has lived at the apartment complex at 7381 Normandie Court for years, officials said, and the property is now fenced off. 
According to county property records, the multibuilding garden apartment complex was built in 1970 and owned by an LLC with a mailing address in Brooklyn, New York. 
In the past, the property was called French Quarter Apartments. 
Army Corps of Engineers officials said the contaminated material is underground and people nearby are not at risk. 
At this point, agency officials don’t think any other buildings need to be demolished. 
“Cleanup began in the 1990s,” said Kim Visintine, one of the founders of the resident advocacy group Coldwater Creek-Just the Facts. 
“That’s 40 years of flooding and rain going into the creek, so I would expect them to find additional sites.” 
Studies have found people who lived near the creek were more likely to contract diseases associated with nuclear waste. 
Harvard University researchers last year found those who lived nearby had increased instances of cancer. 
The Army Corps of Engineers has been testing and cleaning up nuclear contamination on the Coldwater Creek banks for years, Visintine said. 
She said she knows the cleanup is taking a long time but would rather the job be done slowly and carefully. 
“It’s an environmental hazard. 
Should everyone have concern? 
Absolutely! 
That’s why we advocated for so long,” Visintine said. 
“[But] is the risk today what it was for kids riding their bikes in dirt piles of construction material as these new subdivisions were being built? 
No.” 
Earlier this year, the Corps announced it would demolish six houses near the creek in Florissant after workers found contaminated dirt under their foundations. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.7%Sarah Fentem: 1.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Confirmation Bias3.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 17.5%Sarah Fentem: 3.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.7%Availability Heuristic17.5%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 1.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 7.0%Sarah Fentem: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias7.0%This article: 16.7%Sarah Fentem: 6.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.3%Framing Effect16.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.8%Sarah Fentem: 1.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Status Quo Bias5.8%This article: 5.8%Sarah Fentem: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect5.8%This article: 8.0%Sarah Fentem: 4.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 4.8%Optimism Bias8.0%This article: 4.1%Sarah Fentem: 1.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.9%Pessimism Bias4.1%This article: 8.9%Sarah Fentem: 6.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.1%Negativity Bias8.9%This article: 1.8%Sarah Fentem: 2.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.1%Self-Serving Bias1.8%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 2.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 1.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.7%Sarah Fentem: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Recency Bias4.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 34.8%Sarah Fentem: 4.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.6%Appeal to Authority34.8%This article: 5.1%Sarah Fentem: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%False Dilemma5.1%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.9%Sarah Fentem: 3.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.7%Hasty Generalization3.9%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 9.7%Sarah Fentem: 6.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 6.6%Appeal to Emotion9.7%This article: 0.8%Sarah Fentem: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Begging the Question0.8%This article: 13.4%Sarah Fentem: 2.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)13.4%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.7%Sarah Fentem: 0.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Burden of Proof2.7%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 5.1%Sarah Fentem: 3.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.6%Anecdotal5.1%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 10.3%Sarah Fentem: 1.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)10.3%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.1%Sarah Fentem: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Middle Ground4.1%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.8%Sarah Fentem: 0.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.8%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 2.5%Sarah Fentem: 1.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.8%Biased Writer Voice2.5%This article: 0.8%Sarah Fentem: 3.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Indoctrination0.8%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sarah Fentem: 0.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

514 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers30%attributed speech361writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageCol. Andy Pannier • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageCol. Andy Pannier • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageKim Visintine • 21 words • 0.0% coverageKim Visintine • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageKim Visintine • 21 words • 0.0% coverageKim Visintine • 4 words • 100.0% coverageKim Visintine • 4 words • 100.0% coverageKim Visintine • 1 words • 0.0% coverageKim Visintine • 9 words • 0.0% coverageKim Visintine • 26 words • 0.0% coverageKim Visintine • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Kim Visintine

100%flagged-word coverage
107 attributed words70% of attributed speech82% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Unattributed Quote+3.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Kim Visintine: 3.7%3.7%Indoctrination+3.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Kim Visintine: 3.7%3.7%Biased Writer Voice-3.6 ptsWriter: 3.6%Kim Visintine: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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