Gothamist77%

How fast does ice falling from NYC rooftops go? Faster than you think.0%

By Ryan Kost75%

2/25/2026, 11:01:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Availability Heuristic, and Appeal to Emotion, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 62.6% saturation with 327 hits. Analysis detected 1,033 faulty-reasoning hits from 522 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the article peer group.

Slick sidewalks and slushy crosswalks are the most obvious menaces after this week’s storm, but New York City officials have another warning: Watch your head. 
The same wet, packable snow that made for easy snowmen and snowball fights is also clinging stubbornly to rooftops, window ledges and scaffolding across the five boroughs. 
As temperatures hover around or above freezing by day (it’ll be in the mid-40s Wednesday) and dip into the 20s at night, that snow can melt, shift and refreeze into slabs of ice. 
“It was more of a wet character than the previous storm,” said Bill Goodman, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service. 
“So it was sticking better on things.” 
In New York’s canyon of high-rises, where buildings stretch hundreds of feet into the sky, even a relatively small chunk of ice can pick up speed quickly. 
Frank Moscatelli, a clinical professor of physics at NYU, ran the numbers for Gothamist. 
If a 10-pound sphere of ice about 10 centimeters in diameter were to fall, he said, “very quickly"  in about three seconds  "it would reach a terminal velocity of close to 50 or 60 mph.” 
“You’re talking about being potentially hit by something 10 pounds going 50 miles an hour. 
Uh, not pleasant.” 
And it wouldn’t have to fall far to get there. 
“I would judge about 40 feet maybe,” Moscatelli said  roughly four or five stories. 
“Not much.” 
That means even mid-rise buildings can pose a risk if ice accumulates along parapets or ledges. 
The speed, Moscatelli, is also “highly determined by shape.” 
Something pointy will fall faster. 
“It’s all about plowing through the air.” 
New Yorkers have seen what can happen when ice falls from buildings. 
In 2018, a chunk of falling ice totaled a Chevy Equinox. 
In 2014, frozen piles of snow slipped from the sloped surfaces of One World Trade Center, forcing the closure of the PATH entrance below. 
That same year, a man sued a Midtown building’s owner after he was hit by a falling piece of snow. 
Moscatelli, who lives in the city, said he’s mindful when buildings rope off sections of sidewalk after storms  as one building on his block recently did. 
“You could walk more toward the curb,” he suggested, for anyone who is worried. 
Buildings Commissioner Ahmed Tigani said the city is now in the “snow melt” phase of storm response, which depends largely on property owners. 
That includes clearing sidewalks, but also “making sure that you’re clearing icicles and snow masses from above your head  anything that can tilt down or fall on top of people.” 
So far, Tigani said, complaint levels appear consistent with past heavy snowfalls. 
Tigani said it’s not something the city is overly worried about, “but we are trying to make sure that people are doing the things that I just laid out so that we don't have a problem in the first place.” 
Tigani encourages anybody who spots a dangerous overhang or falling ice to call 311. 
As Goodman, the meteorologist, put it: “Especially in the city, you gotta be looking up and making sure nothing's coming down.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 1.5%Gothamist: 2.7%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 2.0%Gothamist: 1.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 21.5%Ryan Kost: 3.6%Gothamist: 3.6%Availability Heuristic21.5%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 1.0%Gothamist: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 1.1%Gothamist: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.8%Gothamist: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 17.6%Ryan Kost: 7.1%Gothamist: 8.4%Framing Effect17.6%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 1.5%Gothamist: 1.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.3%Ryan Kost: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.1%Status Quo Bias2.3%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.7%Ryan Kost: 3.3%Gothamist: 3.6%Optimism Bias7.7%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 1.9%Gothamist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 39.3%Ryan Kost: 10.4%Gothamist: 8.5%Negativity Bias39.3%This article: 5.2%Ryan Kost: 2.0%Gothamist: 2.6%Self-Serving Bias5.2%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.9%Gothamist: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 2.3%Ryan Kost: 1.9%Gothamist: 2.1%In-Group Bias2.3%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.5%Gothamist: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 2.3%Gothamist: 2.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.0%Ryan Kost: 1.7%Gothamist: 1.3%Recency Bias4.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.5%Gothamist: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 62.6%Ryan Kost: 6.0%Gothamist: 4.4%Appeal to Authority62.6%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 2.6%Gothamist: 3.8%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 19.7%Ryan Kost: 5.7%Gothamist: 6.4%Appeal to Emotion19.7%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.8%Gothamist: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 1.3%Gothamist: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 15.7%Ryan Kost: 3.6%Gothamist: 2.8%Anecdotal15.7%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 1.5%Gothamist: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.9%Gothamist: 1.2%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 2.5%Gothamist: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.8%Gothamist: 1.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ryan Kost: 2.4%Gothamist: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

522 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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