The Future of Mining Being Drawn in a Legal Gray Zone 35%

By Lauren Steele0%

4/7/2026, 6:15:19 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Optimism Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 30.4% saturation with 52 hits. Analysis detected 230 faulty-reasoning hits from 171 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 42.4% and a BS Rank of 35% (14,344 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 65.50% of the article peer group.

That loophole is enabled by a 20-pound device, called a node. 
You stick it in the ground, it connects to a satellite, and then it listens for anomalies beneath the earth—anomalies that could indicate the presence of things like copper, gold, lithium, or other important minerals. 
These are the kinds of resources that make modern life possible. 
And because these nodes make a relatively small impact, there aren’t yet regulations about where they can be placed. 
The journalist Lauren Steele has been covering this story for “The Atlantic.” 
She accompanied two mountain guides who’d been paid to plant these nodes in Utah’s Tushar Mountains. 
She’s joining us to talk about how these nodes are changing the future of mining in Utah, elsewhere around the country, and maybe even in outer space. 
GUEST  
Lauren Steele | Journalist and filmmaker. 
The story she wrote for “The Atlantic” is called “The Mysterious Devices Speeding Mining Exploration in Utah.” 
Airdate: Apr. 
8, 2026 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 6.4%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect6.4%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 15.8%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias15.8%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect3.5%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias7.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 20.5%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority20.5%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 15.8%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope15.8%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 11.1%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization11.1%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 17.5%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)17.5%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 6.4%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature6.4%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 30.4%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice30.4%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Lauren Steele: 0.0%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

171 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker46%attributed speech93writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageLauren Steele • 12 words • 0.0% coverageLauren Steele • 16 words • 0.0% coverageLauren Steele • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageLauren Steele • 6 words • 0.0% coverageLauren Steele • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Lauren Steele

79%flagged-word coverage
78 attributed words100% of attributed speech94% writer coverage
0%20.0%40.0%Biased Writer Voice-15.8 ptsWriter: 37.6%Lauren Steele: 21.8%21.8%

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.