MS NOW95%

The government finally released its UFO files. Prepare to be underwhelmed 29%

By Nora McKee0%

5/9/2026, 12:00:11 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 30 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Confirmation Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 26.9% saturation with 174 hits. Analysis detected 1,577 faulty-reasoning hits from 646 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 39.6% and a BS Rank of 29% (15,532 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 71.00% of the article peer group.

The Pentagon on Friday released the first batch of long-awaited government files on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena, billing them as containing “never-before-seen” information. 
For those hoping for proof of extraterrestrial life, the initial drop was something of a disappointment. 
The initial release  containing some 161 files, ranging from declassified State Department papers and firsthand accounts from intelligence officers to Apollo mission transcripts  were accompanied by “unresolved” images of murky skies and small black dots. 
The tranche included videos in which the dots appear to move and a composite rendering based on eyewitness accounts that displays an “ellipsoid bronze metallic object” that “materialized out of a bright light in the sky” before disappearing. 
Definitive evidence of alien life this was not. 
“WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?” 
President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social following the drop, telling the American people to “decide for themselves” and “Have fun and enjoy!” 
A bipartisan group of lawmakers in Congress has spent years pushing for a release of this nature. 
Rep. 
Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., called the initial drop a clear “win,” saying the release demonstrates that UAPs exist and cannot be dismissed. 
“We’re not going to try to hide it,” Luna said. 
“We’re not going to lie about it, and I think that transparency is the best form of disinfectant, because really, ultimately, it’ll be up to the American people to decide.” 
Luna said that she is in ongoing discussions with the Pentagon and expects the next set of files  including more than 40 specific documents that she and others have long sought  within approximately 30 days. 
The files will live on a dedicated page on the Department of Defense’s website that features President Trump’s initial Truth Social post in which he called for the Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to “begin the process of identifying and releasing Government files related to alien and extraterrestrial life.” 
In a press release Friday, Hegseth said that the files have “long fueled justified speculation,” and that the department is in “lockstep” with Trump to bring about “unprecedented transparency.” 
Disappointed reactions came in reply to the White House’s post on X. 
One user wrote that the videos looked “like they were filmed on a potato in 2005.” 
Another called it “the most underwhelming thing” they’d ever seen. 
Among UAP researchers, the mood was no more celebratory. 
“These are genuine UFO cases, but they are not particularly interesting UFO cases,” UAP analyst Mick West told MS NOW. 
“The reason they can’t identify these things is pretty simple, really. 
It's because they're too far away. 
These are little objects  and you've seen the videos  [are] usually little white or black specks, and they're just kind of like, kind of drifting or flying by.” 
He added that many of the videos and photos released were not new. 
Many had already been released by previous administrations. 
“It's basically more of the same,” said West, who has created software that aids in UAP analysis and has appeared on television and in documentaries due to his deep understanding of the topic. 
“And this is something that the government's been releasing  releasing documents and videos like this for several years now. 
This isn't new.” 
When asked if he saw a bombshell coming in any of the future drops, West was skeptical. 
“No, I mean, it'd be great if that was true. 
I'm not seeing anything to back that up.” 
Rep. 
Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., welcomed the release, but is ready for more. 
“There are other documents right now that could easily be released,” Moskowitz told MS NOW. 
“The American people know the government knows more, and it's hiding information. 
And I think the American people have a right to know, and then they can make their own decisions.” 
Mychael Schnell contributed reporting to this article. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 13.6%Nora McKee: 5.1%MS NOW: 7.5%Confirmation Bias13.6%This article: 10.8%Nora McKee: 2.7%MS NOW: 1.2%Anchoring Bias10.8%This article: 13.0%Nora McKee: 2.8%MS NOW: 3.7%Availability Heuristic13.0%This article: 5.7%Nora McKee: 0.9%MS NOW: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic5.7%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.2%MS NOW: 1.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 7.1%Nora McKee: 3.1%MS NOW: 2.6%Overconfidence Bias7.1%This article: 12.2%Nora McKee: 5.7%MS NOW: 15.4%Framing Effect12.2%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 3.7%Nora McKee: 1.9%MS NOW: 0.9%Status Quo Bias3.7%This article: 5.7%Nora McKee: 0.9%MS NOW: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect5.7%This article: 9.0%Nora McKee: 4.3%MS NOW: 2.4%Optimism Bias9.0%This article: 7.0%Nora McKee: 2.0%MS NOW: 3.2%Pessimism Bias7.0%This article: 10.1%Nora McKee: 9.0%MS NOW: 19.2%Negativity Bias10.1%This article: 5.7%Nora McKee: 0.9%MS NOW: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias5.7%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.3%MS NOW: 3.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 1.4%Nora McKee: 2.6%MS NOW: 3.5%In-Group Bias1.4%This article: 3.1%Nora McKee: 0.9%MS NOW: 2.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias3.1%This article: 11.1%Nora McKee: 4.0%MS NOW: 2.2%Halo Effect11.1%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.9%MS NOW: 1.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.0%Nora McKee: 3.9%MS NOW: 1.8%Recency Bias5.0%This article: 1.1%Nora McKee: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.6%Primacy Effect1.1%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.2%MS NOW: 0.2%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 3.6%MS NOW: 4.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 1.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 19.7%Nora McKee: 5.3%MS NOW: 5.4%Appeal to Authority19.7%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 2.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 2.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 11.3%Nora McKee: 4.1%MS NOW: 8.1%Hasty Generalization11.3%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.9%MS NOW: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 1.1%MS NOW: 0.9%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 7.0%Nora McKee: 5.9%MS NOW: 9.8%Appeal to Emotion7.0%This article: 4.6%Nora McKee: 1.0%MS NOW: 2.4%Begging the Question4.6%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 2.8%MS NOW: 3.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 7.7%Nora McKee: 1.4%MS NOW: 0.9%Burden of Proof7.7%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 11.8%Nora McKee: 1.8%MS NOW: 2.6%Anecdotal11.8%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.8%Nora McKee: 2.5%MS NOW: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.8%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.6%Nora McKee: 0.4%MS NOW: 0.1%Middle Ground2.6%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.3%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 1.9%Nora McKee: 0.3%MS NOW: 0.3%Special Pleading1.9%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 1.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 26.9%Nora McKee: 4.9%MS NOW: 2.5%Unattributed Quote26.9%This article: 0.9%Nora McKee: 3.0%MS NOW: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection0.9%This article: 4.3%Nora McKee: 4.5%MS NOW: 14.2%Biased Writer Voice4.3%This article: 11.1%Nora McKee: 3.2%MS NOW: 2.1%Indoctrination11.1%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 5.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Nora McKee: 0.0%MS NOW: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

646 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers57%attributed speech276writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageDonald Trump • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageAnna Paulina Luna • 22 words • 0.0% coverageAnna Paulina Luna • 10 words • 0.0% coverageAnna Paulina Luna • 30 words • 100.0% coverageAnna Paulina Luna • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 48 words • 100.0% coveragePete Hegseth • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageMick West • 20 words • 0.0% coverageMick West • 11 words • 0.0% coverageMick West • 6 words • 0.0% coverageMick West • 30 words • 0.0% coverageMick West • 13 words • 0.0% coverageMick West • 8 words • 0.0% coverageMick West • 33 words • 0.0% coverageMick West • 20 words • 0.0% coverageMick West • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageMick West • 10 words • 0.0% coverageMick West • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageJared Moskowitz • 11 words • 0.0% coverageJared Moskowitz • 15 words • 0.0% coverageJared Moskowitz • 12 words • 0.0% coverageJared Moskowitz • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Pete Hegseth

100%flagged-word coverage
29 attributed words7.8% of attributed speech97% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+47.5 ptsWriter: 52.5%Pete Hegseth: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-10.1 ptsWriter: 10.1%Pete Hegseth: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-2.2 ptsWriter: 2.2%Pete Hegseth: 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.