Futurism⁠88%

Incredible Video Shows Chinese Rocket Get Hit by Lightning Mid-Launch ⁠78%

By Frank Landymore⁠67%

7/25/2026, 12:01:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Appeal to Authority, and Anecdotal, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 25.5% saturation with 96 hits. Analysis detected 887 faulty-reasoning hits from 377 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 69% and a BS Rank of ⁠78% (4,996 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 77.20% of the article peer group.

A Chinese rocket was smitten by a bolt from the heavens right after it lifted off. 
And if this was a blessing or a curse from a higher power, we don’t know. 
The spacecraft, a Long March-3B rocket, launched from the Xichang Satellite Launch Center in southwestern China on Thursday, according to Space.com . 
Its mission was to deliver a communications relay satellite to geostationary orbit, something the dependable workhorse routinely does. 
It turned out to be more than just a regular launch. 
Awe-inspiring footage of the occasion ( another angle here ) shows cheers erupting from the crowd as the rocket heaves itself into the air. 
But they’re soon stunned by an even greater spectacle: thirty seconds into the flight, lightning crackles across the sky and strikes the rocket, eliciting cries of disbelief. 
All one man can say is “lightning, lightning!” 
repeatedly. 
An incredibly-timed photo even shows the bolt right at the moment that it struck the tip of the spacecraft. 
Chinese Rocket gets struck by lightning. 
by u/Positive-Height-3848 in interesting 
If this was some sort of divine augury, it appeared to be benevolent. 
The China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation announced that the rocket safely survived the trip into space and deployed the satellite, though it’s unclear if it sustained any minor damage that didn’t drastically affect the mission. 
NASA’s Apollo 12 mission in 1969 was struck by lightning twice, damaging the Saturn V rocket that was carrying a crew of three astronauts, affecting some of the onboard instruments. 
It continued mostly without a hitch after that. 
Not all were so lucky. 
In 1987, Space.com notes, an unmanned Atlas-Centaur 67 rocket was zapped by lightning just 48 seconds into its flight, causing one of its computers to go haywire. 
This drastically changed the rocket’s course, and it broke up midflight. 
Since then, NASA has adopted Lightning Launch Commit Criteria that places stricter rules on the weather conditions rockets are launched in. 
Take heed, Chinese rocketeers. 
Maybe this is a sign. 
More on spaceflight: China Is Catching Up With SpaceX Fast, Landing First Reusable Rocket Booster on Offshore Platform 
The post Incredible Video Shows Chinese Rocket Get Hit by Lightning Mid-Launch appeared first on Futurism . 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.7%Frank Landymore: 4.4%Futurism: 6.1%Confirmation Bias7.7%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.9%Futurism: 1.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 23.6%Frank Landymore: 5.8%Futurism: 6.2%Availability Heuristic23.6%This article: 12.7%Frank Landymore: 1.5%Futurism: 1.5%Representativeness Heuristic12.7%This article: 5.0%Frank Landymore: 0.6%Futurism: 0.6%Hindsight Bias5.0%This article: 9.5%Frank Landymore: 1.9%Futurism: 2.7%Overconfidence Bias9.5%This article: 4.2%Frank Landymore: 10.6%Futurism: 11.3%Framing Effect4.2%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.5%Futurism: 1.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.6%Frank Landymore: 0.5%Futurism: 0.7%Status Quo Bias5.6%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.0%Futurism: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.8%Frank Landymore: 1.4%Futurism: 2.2%Optimism Bias4.8%This article: 6.4%Frank Landymore: 2.9%Futurism: 4.4%Pessimism Bias6.4%This article: 15.4%Frank Landymore: 20.9%Futurism: 22.5%Negativity Bias15.4%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 1.1%Futurism: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 1.6%Futurism: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.2%Futurism: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.3%Futurism: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.2%Futurism: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.8%Futurism: 1.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.9%Futurism: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.0%Futurism: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.2%Frank Landymore: 2.1%Futurism: 2.1%Recency Bias7.2%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.3%Futurism: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.1%Futurism: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 1.0%Futurism: 1.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.1%Futurism: 0.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 23.1%Frank Landymore: 5.5%Futurism: 6.8%Appeal to Authority23.1%This article: 4.2%Frank Landymore: 2.5%Futurism: 2.6%False Dilemma4.2%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 1.2%Futurism: 2.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.1%Futurism: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.0%Frank Landymore: 9.7%Futurism: 10.5%Hasty Generalization8.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 1.0%Futurism: 1.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 1.0%Futurism: 1.1%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 20.2%Frank Landymore: 8.2%Futurism: 9.5%Appeal to Emotion20.2%This article: 4.8%Frank Landymore: 1.1%Futurism: 1.5%Begging the Question4.8%This article: 6.4%Frank Landymore: 5.1%Futurism: 4.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.4%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.3%Futurism: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 1.0%Futurism: 1.1%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.6%Futurism: 0.4%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.4%Futurism: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 21.2%Frank Landymore: 5.1%Futurism: 4.4%Anecdotal21.2%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.0%Futurism: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.2%Frank Landymore: 3.2%Futurism: 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.2%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.0%Futurism: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.1%Futurism: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.1%Futurism: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.1%Futurism: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.3%Futurism: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.4%Frank Landymore: 4.3%Futurism: 3.9%Unattributed Quote2.4%This article: 2.1%Frank Landymore: 2.2%Futurism: 2.6%Quote-first Misdirection2.1%This article: 25.5%Frank Landymore: 17.6%Futurism: 20.7%Biased Writer Voice25.5%This article: 10.1%Frank Landymore: 2.2%Futurism: 2.1%Indoctrination10.1%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.2%Futurism: 2.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Frank Landymore: 0.0%Futurism: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Frank Landymore: 1.2%Futurism: 1.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.1%

377 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers33%attributed speech254writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageSpace.com • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageChina Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageSpace.com • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageNASA • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageFuturism • 17 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
36 attributed words29% of attributed speech93% writer coverage
0%20.0%40.0%Biased Writer Voice-37.8 ptsWriter: 37.8%China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-15.0 ptsWriter: 15.0%China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-3.5 ptsWriter: 3.5%China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-3.1 ptsWriter: 3.1%China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -1.6 ptsWriter: 1.6%China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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