Mystery orcas return to Seattle area ⁠1%

By John Ryan⁠0%

3/28/2026, 12:09:45 AM

Topics: Environment
Keywords: Orcas, Puget Sound

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Biased Writer Voice, and Optimism Bias, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 41% saturation with 205 hits. Analysis detected 894 faulty-reasoning hits from 500 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 3.9% and a BS Rank of ⁠1% (20,247 of 20,363 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 99.40% of the article peer group.

The mystery orcas are back in town. 
A trio of unidentified orcas, never observed in the Pacific Northwest before, showed up in early March, first in Canada’s Vancouver Harbour, then in the busy ports of Seattle, Tacoma, and Olympia. 
Where they hail from is still unknown, though researchers determined these mammal-eating, transient orcas had been seen once before, in Anchorage, Alaska. 
Unusual, cookie-shaped scars indicated they had also spent time in the deep, warm seas favored by the micro-predators known as a cookie-cutter sharks. 
The mystery trio showed up again Thursday morning, cruising along the downtown Seattle waterfront in Elliott Bay and the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway, beneath the giant cranes and cargo ships of the Port of Seattle’s Harbor Island. 
The wild predators did not shy away from even the most industrial waters in their apparent hunt for seals and sea lions. 
The trio, believed to be a mother and her two sons, mostly hugged the King County shoreline as they headed to Tacoma’s heavily industrialized Commencement Bay. 
Observers with the Orca Network reported the orcas heading into Tacoma’s Thea Foss Waterway, past the massive Temco grain elevators and a Silver Cloud Hotel, before swimming toward Gig Harbor and Vashon Island. 
On Friday, other whale watchers spotted the trio near Bremerton and Bainbridge Island. 
A small National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration research boat tagged along Thursday to get photos and possibly DNA to help unravel the mystery of these unusual visitors. 
NOAA researcher Brad Hanson held an air rifle as he stood in the bow of the inflatable boat, hoping to get a biopsy — a tiny plug of skin and blubber — to reveal the orcas’ genetics and exposure to long-lasting pollutants like PCBs. 
In an email, Hanson called it "a unique opportunity without a lot of investment to get info on relatively rare killer whales." 
“We weren’t able to get a biopsy nor did we get any recordings as the whales only appeared to hunt once with no obvious kill,” Hanson said. 
Unlike the region’s endangered southern resident killer whales, which hunt by emitting sounds to echolocate salmon in the inky depths, transient orcas hunt their mammalian prey silently. 
They are unlikely to vocalize until after they have had a kill. 
The team was able to get photographs and pump up seawater the whales had just swum through to obtain traces of environmental DNA or “eDNA.” 
The tidbits of floating genetic material can reveal animals' presence, genetics, and diets when biopsies are not practical. 
The scientists tracked the orca trio for about two and a half hours, from the Fauntleroy ferry dock in West Seattle to Three Tree Point in Burien, with whales occasionally surfacing next to them. 
Researchers have federal permits to approach closer than the buffer zones mandated by state and federal laws. 
All other vessels are required to stay at least 200 yards away from the transient orcas and 1,000 yards away from the endangered southern residents. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%John Ryan: 3.0%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 1.2%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%John Ryan: 3.8%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic2.6%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.9%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.7%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 7.6%John Ryan: 1.6%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias7.6%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 9.7%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 2.3%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.0%John Ryan: 1.9%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias5.0%This article: 4.4%John Ryan: 0.5%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect4.4%This article: 9.0%John Ryan: 3.0%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias9.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 3.1%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%John Ryan: 7.7%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias4.4%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 1.3%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.4%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 2.3%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.6%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 1.0%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.6%John Ryan: 0.7%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias7.6%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.4%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.6%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.3%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 24.2%John Ryan: 7.5%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority24.2%This article: 5.4%John Ryan: 1.4%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma5.4%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 1.4%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.4%John Ryan: 2.8%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization6.4%This article: 6.6%John Ryan: 0.3%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring6.6%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.6%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 8.1%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.8%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 5.4%John Ryan: 1.5%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.4%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.3%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 4.6%John Ryan: 0.9%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature4.6%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 7.0%John Ryan: 2.7%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal7.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 41.0%John Ryan: 1.7%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)41.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 3.4%John Ryan: 0.1%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading3.4%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.7%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.4%John Ryan: 0.9%KUOW: 1.0%Unattributed Quote5.4%This article: 4.4%John Ryan: 0.6%KUOW: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection4.4%This article: 15.6%John Ryan: 1.9%KUOW: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice15.6%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.7%KUOW: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.7%KUOW: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John Ryan: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 8.8%John Ryan: 0.3%KUOW: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…8.8%

500 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers31%attributed speech347writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageOrca Network • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageNational Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration • 27 words • 100.0% coverageBrad Hanson • 44 words • 100.0% coverageBrad Hanson • 22 words • 0.0% coverageBrad Hanson • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverage
100%flagged-word coverage
27 attributed words18% of attributed speech83% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+85.3 ptsWriter: 14.7%National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration: 100.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection-6.3 ptsWriter: 6.3%National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration: 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.