ABC News99%

New trove of eerie UFO files released by the Pentagon 94%

7/11/2026, 12:33:40 AM

Topics: Video
Keywords: Youtube

BS Summary: This video contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Anecdotal, and Recency Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 50.2% saturation with 122 hits. Analysis detected 804 faulty-reasoning hits from 243 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 90.1% and a BS Rank of 94% (1,308 of 21,186 videos). This video is worse (more manipulative) than 93.80% of the video peer group.

Now to the Pentagon releasing its latest trove of files related to UFOs. 
The dozens of videos, images, and reports, 
some as recent as last year. 
Here's Perry Russom. 
>> Tonight, the eerie new videos released by the Pentagon showing more of what the government calls unidentified anomalous phenomena or UAPs. 
40 new files today 
including 19 videos. 
One UAP described by a pilot as having flight characteristics unlike anything they had seen in their 28 years of military service. 
Two encounters allegedly happening just last year. 
One video shows a UAP in the clouds, at times partially hidden. 
The camera follows it for just over 2 minutes. 
A second video shows what looks like a six-pointed star bobbing in the skies above the Yellow Sea in Asia. 
Camera zooming in on this UAP from 2020. 
A partially redacted Pentagon report says it was about 12 to 15 ft tall. 
In 2015, the US military capturing a UAP speeding past their camera. 
Three new pictures released including this one taken on board the Columbia space shuttle in 1996. 
An object apparently floating in orbit around Earth. 
It's still not clear what any of these objects are. 
>> Rachel, so far the Pentagon has released more than 300 UAP files under directive by President Trump. 
The Pentagon says more files are coming, Rachel. 
>> Yeah, lots of interest in this. Okay, 
Perry. Thank you. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%ABC News: 2.2%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 16.0%ABC News: 0.7%Anchoring Bias16.0%This article: 38.3%ABC News: 3.0%Availability Heuristic38.3%This article: 12.3%ABC News: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic12.3%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 5.3%ABC News: 1.1%Overconfidence Bias5.3%This article: 16.5%ABC News: 6.7%Framing Effect16.5%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.3%ABC News: 2.4%Optimism Bias3.3%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 1.0%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 23.9%ABC News: 7.6%Negativity Bias23.9%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 1.5%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 9.1%ABC News: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error9.1%This article: 4.9%ABC News: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias4.9%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 5.8%ABC News: 2.2%Halo Effect5.8%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 24.3%ABC News: 1.3%Recency Bias24.3%This article: 5.3%ABC News: 0.4%Primacy Effect5.3%This article: 4.1%ABC News: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 50.2%ABC News: 3.3%Appeal to Authority50.2%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.9%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 23.9%ABC News: 2.8%Hasty Generalization23.9%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.3%ABC News: 0.5%Bandwagon3.3%This article: 16.5%ABC News: 4.3%Appeal to Emotion16.5%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 9.9%ABC News: 0.3%Burden of Proof9.9%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 36.6%ABC News: 1.2%Anecdotal36.6%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 21.4%ABC News: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)21.4%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 1.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ABC News: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

243 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers14%attributed speech209writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coveragePentagon • 14 words • 0.0% coverageUS military • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coveragePentagon • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Pentagon

100%flagged-word coverage
22 attributed words65% of attributed speech99% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

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.