BS Summary: This article contains 34 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Availability Heuristic, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 16.4% saturation with 191 hits. Analysis detected 2,066 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,165 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 40.8% and a BS Rank of 32% (15,065 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 68.80% of the article peer group.

Leamus // Getty Images 
Here’s what you’ll learn when you read this story: 
On the morning of December 15, 1900, gale-force winds and raging waves hit the island of Eilean Mòr, and its lighthouse keepers were never seen again. 
It’s thought that the men had gone outside to secure equipment, but an enormous wave swept them out to sea before they could get back inside. 
With no bodies or evidence of how the men disappeared, and superstitions swirling around the island, their last moments remain a mystery. 
Shrouded in mist and fog, the craggy island of Eilean Mòr in the Flannan Isles of Scotland’s Inner Hebrides is haunted by legends. 
Some say fairies dwell in the crevices of rocks. 
Others speak of the Blue Men of the Minch —creatures with blue skin and gray faces lurking in underwater caves whose wrath sends storms bubbling up from the deep. 
But one mystery of this remote, windblown locale belongs not to legend but to history: Three men truly did vanish from its lighthouse. 
As the iron-hulled clipper ship Hesperus made its way through the treacherous waters of the Hebrides archipelago, Joseph Moore was overcome with dread. 
Moore was a lighthouse keeper, and while sailing towards Eilean Mòr on December 26, 1900, to relieve one of its keepers of duty, he realized that the lighthouse flag (which lighthouse keepers would normally use to signal incoming ships) was nowhere in sight. 
It was expected that two of the three keepers—James Ducat, Thomas Marshall, and Donald McArthur—would come out to meet the boat when it docked and give the crew assistance with unloading, especially on an island with cliffs so unforgiving that a crude staircase needed to be carved out of the bedrock as a pathway to shuttle supplies back and forth. 
Moore’s captain, Jim Harvie, blasted the ship’s horn, but even after he fired a signal rocket, lapping waves were the only response. 
Moore became suspicious. 
Lighthouse keepers never leave supply vessels waiting—least of all men as dependable as Ducat, Marshall, and McArthur. 
Once ashore, he searched for them, unable to shake a heavy sense of foreboding. 
The entrance gate was closed, but the kitchen door stood open. 
Inside, the air hung stale and cold. 
No fire burned in the fireplace, and only one oilskin coat hung where there should have been three. 
The beds were empty. 
The place was deserted . 
Upstairs, the lightroom continued the strange story: the lamp had been polished, its fountain filled with fuel, and the window blinds were drawn in proper order. 
Everything was eerily tidy, as though the keepers had completed their duties and simply ceased to exist. 
Only the bent and broken iron railings outside hinted that something had not gone according to routine. 
“The iron railings along the passage connecting railway with footpath to landing [were uprooted from] their foundation and broken in several places, also [the] railing round [the] crane, and handrail for making mooring rope fast for boat, is entirely carried away,” Moore stated in a report dated December 28, 1900. 
“Now there is nothing to give us an indication that it was there the poor men lost their lives.” 
Scouring the deserted lighthouse for evidence, Moore came upon the logbook of the keepers (which had last been updated on December 13) and their slate (updated on the morning of December 15). 
The men must have disappeared shortly afterward. 
It was possible that two of the men, likely Ducat and Marshall, had panicked in the face of an impending storm and were trying to secure equipment when a towering wave took them under. 
There always needs to be one keeper inside, and that had probably been McArthur, whose oilskin was the only one left unworn. 
Running to help through the gale-force winds had been howling around Eilean Mòr that day, he may have been swept as well. 
But a few holes remain in that idea. 
For one, while waves must have been crashing dangerously close to the lighthouse, any hypothetical wave that could have fully washed the men out to sea would have had to be a hundred feet high. 
For another, it seems that securing a box of equipment with mooring ropes would have likely been the last thing on the men’s minds. 
However, Ducat had been previously reprimanded about an accident with the crane used for hoisting boxes of supplies up to the lighthouse tower, so he risked being fined or fired if the hoisting equipment wasn’t kept in working order. 
That might be enough to explain why he and Marshall would have rushed out to beat the storm before any serious damage was done. 
Eventually, Robert Muirhead (the superintendent) led an investigation of his own and came to the same conclusion as Moore: The keepers must have been swept away by a powerful wave. 
While no bodies ever washed up, what is taken by the sea is not always returned . 
Not everyone believed that Ducat, Marshall, and McArthur had been swallowed by raging waters, and folklore often superseded logic. 
Sea serpents, fairies, elves, and the Blue Men were all implicated in the disappearance of the men. 
There was also Moore’s account of three ravens ominously perched on top of the light tower. 
Superstition took over when he saw them flap their dark wings, soaring through the overcast sky, and he would later recount how he feared these were the lost men transmogrified into birds. 
Their names are still said to echo around the island as if their spirits never left. 
“Moore was naturally very much upset by the unfortunate occurrence, and appeared very nervous,” Muirhead said in his official report . 
“If this nervousness does not leave Moore, he will require to be transferred, but I am reluctant to recommend this, as I would desire to have one man at least who knows the work of the Station.” 
With no telegraph on the island to notify anyone that they were in danger, no other means of communication, and no traces of human remains, the truth about what actually happened to the men was lost with them. 
Elizabeth Rayne is a creature who writes. 
Her work has appeared in Popular Mechanics, Ars Technica, SYFY WIRE, Space.com, Live Science, Den of Geek, Forbidden Futures and Collective Tales. 
She lurks right outside New York City with her parrot, Lestat. 
When not writing, she can be found drawing, playing the piano or shapeshifting. 
4 Black Eggs Surfaced From the Deep Ocean 
Is the ‘Betz Mystery Sphere’ Really Alien Tech? 
We May Have Been Wrong About the Origin of Life 
Stuck Stem Cells Culprit for Gray Hair 
An 1877 El Niño Wreaked Havoc. 
It May Do So Again. 
Scientists Just Solved a Major Coffin Mystery 
Chernobyl Stewards May Pass Mutations to Children 
Earth’s Hidden Eighth Continent Is No Longer Lost 
A Breakthrough Treatment Could Reverse Blindness 
Quantum Gravity May Unlock an Antigravity Machine 
Tiny Humans Could Rewrite the Story of Evolution 
The Truth Behind Japan’s “Atlantis” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.9%Elizabeth Rayne: 4.1%Popular Mechanics: 4.4%Confirmation Bias6.9%This article: 8.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.3%Popular Mechanics: 1.1%Anchoring Bias8.0%This article: 13.6%Elizabeth Rayne: 3.4%Popular Mechanics: 3.1%Availability Heuristic13.6%This article: 7.4%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.7%Popular Mechanics: 1.5%Representativeness Heuristic7.4%This article: 1.5%Elizabeth Rayne: 4.1%Popular Mechanics: 1.8%Hindsight Bias1.5%This article: 8.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 2.3%Popular Mechanics: 2.7%Overconfidence Bias8.1%This article: 2.4%Elizabeth Rayne: 4.2%Popular Mechanics: 3.6%Framing Effect2.4%This article: 3.3%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.7%Popular Mechanics: 0.3%Loss Aversion3.3%This article: 3.2%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.3%Popular Mechanics: 0.6%Status Quo Bias3.2%This article: 3.3%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.6%Popular Mechanics: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect3.3%This article: 1.8%Elizabeth Rayne: 2.3%Popular Mechanics: 3.3%Optimism Bias1.8%This article: 2.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.8%Popular Mechanics: 1.1%Pessimism Bias2.1%This article: 16.4%Elizabeth Rayne: 5.9%Popular Mechanics: 5.3%Negativity Bias16.4%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.5%Popular Mechanics: 0.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.4%Popular Mechanics: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 2.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.3%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias2.1%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: 3.3%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.3%Popular Mechanics: 1.9%Halo Effect3.3%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: 2.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.0%Popular Mechanics: 1.2%Recency Bias2.1%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: 6.9%Elizabeth Rayne: 3.1%Popular Mechanics: 5.5%Appeal to Authority6.9%This article: 5.5%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.2%Popular Mechanics: 1.6%False Dilemma5.5%This article: 0.6%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.4%Popular Mechanics: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.6%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.1%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 3.4%Popular Mechanics: 4.2%Hasty Generalization6.1%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.2%Popular Mechanics: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.8%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.2%Popular Mechanics: 0.3%Bandwagon0.8%This article: 13.5%Elizabeth Rayne: 5.2%Popular Mechanics: 3.3%Appeal to Emotion13.5%This article: 0.6%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.6%Popular Mechanics: 0.8%Begging the Question0.6%This article: 10.8%Elizabeth Rayne: 3.9%Popular Mechanics: 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.8%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 5.3%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.6%Popular Mechanics: 0.6%Burden of Proof5.3%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: 8.2%Elizabeth Rayne: 2.6%Popular Mechanics: 2.6%Anecdotal8.2%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 5.7%Elizabeth Rayne: 3.2%Popular Mechanics: 2.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.7%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.7%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.1%Popular Mechanics: 0.2%Middle Ground0.7%This article: 2.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.0%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Personal Incredulity2.1%This article: 2.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.1%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Special Pleading2.1%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.2%Popular Mechanics: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.1%Elizabeth Rayne: 1.3%Popular Mechanics: 1.4%Unattributed Quote5.1%This article: 0.0%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.7%Popular Mechanics: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 15.5%Elizabeth Rayne: 5.4%Popular Mechanics: 5.9%Biased Writer Voice15.5%This article: 0.8%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.3%Popular Mechanics: 1.1%Indoctrination0.8%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: 1.9%Elizabeth Rayne: 0.5%Popular Mechanics: 3.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.9%

1165 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers11%attributed speech1,038writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 60 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageJoseph Moore • 50 words • 100.0% coverageJoseph Moore • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Muirhead • 21 words • 0.0% coverageRobert Muirhead • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Joseph Moore

100%flagged-word coverage
69 attributed words54% of attributed speech98% writer coverage
0%37.5%75.0%Unattributed Quote+71.6 ptsWriter: 0.9%Joseph Moore: 72.5%72.5%Biased Writer Voice-17.4 ptsWriter: 17.4%Joseph Moore: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -2.1 ptsWriter: 2.1%Joseph Moore: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-0.9 ptsWriter: 0.9%Joseph Moore: 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.