He Found a Lost WWII Submarine After Decades of Searching. There Might Be 2 Tons of Gold on Board. 45%

By Elizabeth Rayne29%

6/26/2026, 1:30:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Confirmation Bias, and Hindsight Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 19.8% saturation with 199 hits. Analysis detected 1,807 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,006 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 47.7% and a BS Rank of 45% (12,071 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 55.20% of the article peer group.

The Japanese Imperial Navy’s I  Dai Gojūni Sensuikan, or I-52 submarine, departed from Kure, Japan, en route to Nazi-occupied France on March 10, 1944. 
The submarine, codenamed Momi (which translates to “fir tree”), was set to rendezvous with a German U-boat near Lorient, and carried a cargo that included 2.2 tons of gold, which was meant as payment for technology that the Germans had equipped Japanese forces with. 
Besides the gold—which would be worth over $100 million today—the sub had been carrying tons of tungsten and molybdenum, opium, and caffeine when it departed Japan. 
It also took on tons of quinine, raw rubber, and tin in the form of stamped ingots during a stop in Singapore before continuing on its fateful voyage, which was supposed to be an undercover operation. 
But unbeknownst to the Japanese, cryptologists had been decoding a classified map of the sub’s route, and knew exactly where it was headed. 
So, flanked by an escort of four destroyer escorts and a destroyer, the aircraft carrier USS Bogue headed for the mid-Atlantic to intercept the I-52. 
On board the carrier was a Grumman TBF Avenger torpedo bomber flown by Lieutenant Commander Jesse D. 
Taylor. 
After dropping a sonobuoy intended to identify submarine activity through sonar, he heard the unmistakable sound of a submarine propeller and deployed a torpedo. 
“We had probably been airborne an hour to an hour and a half when Ed Whitlock, who was the radio operator, got on the intercom and told me he had a blip on his radar screen, so they honed in, and we dropped the parachute flares which spotted it,” Taylor said in a 2000 National Geographic documentary. 
“You were out to do your job, [which] was to sink a submarine if you found one.” 
Other sonobuoys picked up signals from what may have been an underwater explosion close to midnight, and because the Americans were still uncertain whether they had indeed hit the Japanese sub, Lieutenant Junior Grade William Gordon dropped another torpedo. 
A massive explosion followed before the ocean went silent again, and what Taylor said next survives on a recording that can still be heard clearly through a haze of static: “We got that sonofabitch!” 
When the destroyer USS Janssen approached the site of the bombing the next day, among the flotsam its crew discovered were scraps of silk, a sandal, tons of rubber, and scattered human body parts that were grisly evidence of a successful mission. 
But no gold was ever recovered from the wreckage, and for many years, the remains of the ship were as good as lost. 
Following the sinking of the I-52, a man named Paul Tidwell spent decades trying to locate the vessel, spending countless hours poring over every relevant document he could possibly find. 
The Vietnam War veteran turned historian and shipwreck enthusiast scoured the Library of Congress, the National Archives, and several naval museums, going through thousands of pages containing ships’ logs and other records that could lead him to the site of the fallen submarine. 
In the National Archives, he found stacks of recently declassified documents that included intelligence reports and enemy radio messages that had been decoded, which finally pointed him in the direction of the lost ship—halfway between Barbados and the Cape Verde Islands. 
While Tidwell (who is also a certified salvage diver) was after more than just the lost treasure, the prospect of finding more than 2 tons of gold on the ocean floor attracted investors, and by 1995, he’d raised over $1 million for an expedition. 
As Tidwell scanned the seafloor from onboard the Russian oceanographic vessel R/V Yuzhmorgeologiya—which was chartered by marine contractor Sound Ocean Systems—he and his crew began to grow impatient as signs of the I-52 stubbornly refused to appear. 
Operations Director Tom Dettweiler decided to contact ocean discovery tech company Nauticos, and its founder and president, Navy veteran David Jourdan, proposed that the navigation records that Tidwell’s mission was using were off. 
Jourdan helped redirect the search, and on May 2, 1995, a ghost appeared in the deep—the I-52 had finally been sighted at around 17,000 feet, roughly three miles beneath the surface. 
After years of research, Tidwell had found his submarine. 
But finding the wreck was one thing—reaching the gold was another. 
Three years later, Tidwell returned aboard the R/V Akademik Mstislav Keldysh (recognizable from its cameo in the movie Titanic), equipped with a trio of Mir deep-sea submersibles capable of diving to the wreck site. 
Initially, spirits were high. 
While parts of the hull had been smashed by the explosion, the submarine was recognizable, and most of its wooden planking remained intact more than fifty years after it had been sunk. 
However, elation quickly dissolved into frustration as the trio of submersibles dove to search through the debris. 
One submersible discovered a metal box filled with opium. 
Submersible claws grabbed onto blocks of tin. 
Vestiges of human life still haunted the site (which has since been designated as a war grave), and though their remains may lie in parts of the submarine that have so far been unreachable, a solitary shoe humanizes those who were lost in the wreck. 
And Some chemical traces of gold in the sand near the submarine caught Tidwell’s attention. 
But despite all that was found, the 2.2 tons of gold have yet to resurface. 
“I don’t want any part of I-52 unsolved,” Tidwell, who now owns the shipwreck recovery company Au Holdings, said in the National Geographic documentary. 
“I really want to get in there and record the inside and to do a recovery, and there’s more personal effects I’d like to recover [and have] returned to families.” 
It’s thought that the darkest shadows of the submarine, which remain unexplored, could house the yet-unrecovered gold bars. 
But though the treasure (and some other remnants of the I-52’s cargo) still continue to elude Tidwell, he still hasn’t tired of searching for them. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 16.2%Elizabeth Rayne: 4.1%Popular Mechanics: 4.4%Confirmation Bias16.2%This article: 11.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.3%Popular Mechanics: 1.1%Anchoring Bias11.1%This article: 12.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 3.4%Popular Mechanics: 3.1%Availability Heuristic12.1%This article: 4.3%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.7%Popular Mechanics: 1.5%Representativeness Heuristic4.3%This article: 12.9%Elizabeth Rayne: 4.1%Popular Mechanics: 1.8%Hindsight Bias12.9%This article: 9.5%Elizabeth Rayne: 2.3%Popular Mechanics: 2.7%Overconfidence Bias9.5%This article: 3.7%Elizabeth Rayne: 4.2%Popular Mechanics: 3.6%Framing Effect3.7%This article: 3.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.7%Popular Mechanics: 0.3%Loss Aversion3.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.3%Popular Mechanics: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 5.5%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.6%Popular Mechanics: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect5.5%This article: 7.8%Elizabeth Rayne: 2.3%Popular Mechanics: 3.3%Optimism Bias7.8%This article: 7.5%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.8%Popular Mechanics: 1.1%Pessimism Bias7.5%This article: 19.8%Elizabeth Rayne: 5.9%Popular Mechanics: 5.3%Negativity Bias19.8%This article: 2.4%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.5%Popular Mechanics: 0.6%Self-Serving Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.4%Popular Mechanics: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.3%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.2%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.1%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.3%Popular Mechanics: 1.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.0%Popular Mechanics: 1.2%Recency Bias3.1%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.1%Popular Mechanics: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.1%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.1%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 8.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 3.1%Popular Mechanics: 5.5%Appeal to Authority8.1%This article: 1.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.2%Popular Mechanics: 1.6%False Dilemma1.1%This article: 3.6%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.4%Popular Mechanics: 0.4%Slippery Slope3.6%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.1%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 7.3%Elizabeth Rayne: 3.4%Popular Mechanics: 4.2%Hasty Generalization7.3%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.2%Popular Mechanics: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 4.4%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.2%Popular Mechanics: 0.3%Bandwagon4.4%This article: 17.6%Elizabeth Rayne: 5.2%Popular Mechanics: 3.3%Appeal to Emotion17.6%This article: 1.8%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.6%Popular Mechanics: 0.8%Begging the Question1.8%This article: 12.2%Elizabeth Rayne: 3.9%Popular Mechanics: 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)12.2%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.6%Popular Mechanics: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.7%Popular Mechanics: 0.5%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.3%Popular Mechanics: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 1.5%Elizabeth Rayne: 2.6%Popular Mechanics: 2.6%Anecdotal1.5%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 3.2%Popular Mechanics: 2.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.1%Popular Mechanics: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.1%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.2%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.7%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.3%Popular Mechanics: 1.4%Unattributed Quote1.7%This article: 1.7%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.7%Popular Mechanics: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection1.7%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 5.4%Popular Mechanics: 5.9%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.3%Popular Mechanics: 1.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.1%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.5%Popular Mechanics: 3.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

1006 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers11%attributed speech895writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 44 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageJesse D. Taylor • 57 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 44 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 45 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coveragePaul Tidwell • 24 words • 0.0% coveragePaul Tidwell • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Jesse D. Taylor

100%flagged-word coverage
57 attributed words51% of attributed speech94% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Unattributed Quote-1.9 ptsWriter: 1.9%Jesse D. Taylor: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-1.9 ptsWriter: 1.9%Jesse D. Taylor: 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.