KQED61%

El Niño Could Bring ‘Disruptive Coastal Flooding’ to Bay Area This Winter 73%

By Ezra David Romero0%

6/16/2026, 9:12:57 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Overconfidence Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Pessimism Bias, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 49.7% saturation with 284 hits. Analysis detected 1,365 faulty-reasoning hits from 572 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 65.2% and a BS Rank of 73% (5,964 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 72.80% of the article peer group.

Pacifica’s pier cracked. 
Parts of Marin County are underwater this week, thanks to the Bay Area’s highest-ever summer tides. 
And climate scientists expect coastal flooding to get worse this fall and winter, because of the potentially ‘Super’ El Niño brewing thousands of miles away. 
Federal scientists are now sure El Niño will affect global weather patterns this year. 
And Daniel Swain, a climate scientist with UC Agriculture and Natural Resources, said on Tuesday there’s a 90% confidence level that a record-breaking El Niño event will occur, which could intensify storms, heat up ocean water off the California coast and temporarily raise sea levels. 
Swain said a wetter-than-normal winter is not guaranteed, but San Francisco Bay levels are “almost guaranteed” to be higher. 
“That’s going to be a big concern this year, and it’s only going to grow as this El Niño event intensifies,” Swain said. 
El Niño forms when tropical trade winds weaken or reverse, allowing warm ocean water near Asia to move toward the Pacific Coast. 
This process heats the eastern Pacific Ocean and can alter the jet stream. 
As a result, it can lead to a stormier winter in California. 
It can also disrupt the ocean’s upwelling  a natural process that drives cool, nutrient-rich water to the surface  raising local ocean temperatures and affecting marine life. 
The Pacific Ocean has risen by about 8 inches since the 1880s. 
State scientists project an additional rise of over a foot by 2050, and in worst-case scenarios, 6 feet or more by the end of the century. 
“El Niño is going to temporarily elevate that baseline even further,” Swain said. 
“There’s significant potential that the combination of accumulated global warming plus a very strong to maybe even historic El Niño event in its own right could cause big problems.” 
Swain said El Niño could temporarily raise sea levels on average by “6 inches to 2 feet in elevation for the rest of the year.” 
Storms and onshore winds can also raise sea levels by a foot or two. 
Though that increase may not seem like a lot, combined, Swain said they could add up to a “net increase in sea level during the largest coastal flood events that’s comparable to mid-chest height on the average person.” 
This level of inundation could pose a major risk when natural high tides and storms occur in tandem. 
Swain said elevated sea levels will be a big deal for places that routinely flood across Northern California, including coastal cities like Pacifica, San Francisco, Santa Cruz and parts of Marin County along the bayshore. 
“All of a sudden, we kind of get to the point where 2 to 3 plus feet of temporary sea elevation is possible near California later this year during a major storm event and at least a foot or two the rest of the time,” Swain said. 
“We may see all-time record high water levels during storm events or king tides this year.” 
He adds that this advance notice should prompt local governments to prepare for the coming waves and high tides, especially agencies that run low-lying highways and communities that flood during extreme high tides and storm events. 
“We’re going to have problems,” Swain said. 
“There is some time to do some mitigation. 
You have several months at least before the most disruptive coastal flooding is likely to arrive.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.3%Ezra David Romero: 1.6%CalMatters: 1.9%Confirmation Bias3.3%This article: 12.6%Ezra David Romero: 1.8%CalMatters: 0.9%Anchoring Bias12.6%This article: 5.1%Ezra David Romero: 3.1%CalMatters: 3.0%Availability Heuristic5.1%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.2%CalMatters: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.6%CalMatters: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 26.9%Ezra David Romero: 2.8%CalMatters: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias26.9%This article: 13.1%Ezra David Romero: 7.5%CalMatters: 6.3%Framing Effect13.1%This article: 12.9%Ezra David Romero: 1.2%CalMatters: 1.0%Loss Aversion12.9%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.5%CalMatters: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 1.4%Ezra David Romero: 0.8%CalMatters: 3.5%Optimism Bias1.4%This article: 20.6%Ezra David Romero: 4.4%CalMatters: 1.4%Pessimism Bias20.6%This article: 9.4%Ezra David Romero: 8.5%CalMatters: 6.4%Negativity Bias9.4%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.1%CalMatters: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 1.7%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Ezra David Romero: 0.5%CalMatters: 2.7%Halo Effect6.1%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.8%Ezra David Romero: 0.7%CalMatters: 0.9%Recency Bias2.8%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 14.7%Ezra David Romero: 3.6%CalMatters: 3.1%Appeal to Authority14.7%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 1.2%CalMatters: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 4.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.9%CalMatters: 0.8%Slippery Slope4.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.9%CalMatters: 3.6%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 21.2%Ezra David Romero: 6.2%CalMatters: 5.3%Appeal to Emotion21.2%This article: 2.4%Ezra David Romero: 0.9%CalMatters: 0.6%Begging the Question2.4%This article: 14.2%Ezra David Romero: 1.3%CalMatters: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)14.2%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 6.3%Ezra David Romero: 0.4%CalMatters: 0.3%Burden of Proof6.3%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 5.6%Ezra David Romero: 1.1%CalMatters: 3.1%Anecdotal5.6%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 49.7%Ezra David Romero: 1.9%CalMatters: 1.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)49.7%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.2%CalMatters: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.0%CalMatters: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.3%CalMatters: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.7%CalMatters: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 1.2%CalMatters: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 6.3%Ezra David Romero: 3.1%CalMatters: 1.9%Indoctrination6.3%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 1.7%CalMatters: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.1%CalMatters: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ezra David Romero: 0.2%CalMatters: 1.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

572 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker62%attributed speech215writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 45 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 19 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 13 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 29 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 35 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 47 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 36 words • 100.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 7 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 8 words • 0.0% coverageDaniel Swain • 16 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Daniel Swain

100%flagged-word coverage
357 attributed words100% of attributed speech78% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Indoctrination+10.1 ptsWriter: 0.0%Daniel Swain: 10.1%10.1%

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.