MinnPost33%

Are loons closer relatives to penguins than to ducks? 14%

By Brian Arola48%

7/14/2026, 3:12:35 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 2 faulty reasoning types, including Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Indoctrination as the most egregious example at 17.6% saturation with 46 hits. Analysis detected 48 faulty-reasoning hits from 261 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 30.4% and a BS Rank of 14% (13,531 of 15,664 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 86.40% of the article peer group.

Yes. 
The common loon, Minnesota’s state bird, is more closely related to a penguin than a duck. 
Despite loons predominantly living in the northern hemisphere and penguins mostly living in the southern hemisphere, researchers consider them to be genetic cousins. 
Taxonomic analyses placed them in an evolutionary cluster tracing back 40 million to 50 million years ago, along with herons and pelicans. 
While loons and ducks share habitat on Minnesota lakes, they aren’t close relatives. 
Ducks are closer cousins to geese and swans. 
After sharing a common ancestor, penguins and loons developed distinct characteristics. 
Loons can fly, but struggle to move on land; penguins can’t fly, but waddle on land. 
Penguins use flipper-like wings to swim; loons use webbed feet for underwater propulsion. 
They have some similar features, however, including dense bones to help dive underwater and their tuxedo coloring. 
This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one. 
MinnPost partners with Gigafact to produce fact briefs  bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. 
Read our methodology to learn how we check claims. 
Sources 
Wisconsin Public Radio Fascinating Facts About Loons From A Biologist Who’s Studied Them For Decades 
National Loon Center Ask the Scientist 
The Loon Project Are Loons Ancient? 
Support the news you rely on 
You rely on MinnPost to report on the things that matter to you. 
And we depend on readers like you to help fund our work. 
Will you make a gift to support our work and keep articles like this one paywall-free? 
Donate now 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
0%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
0%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
0%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
0%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
0%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
0%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
17.6%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0.8%

261 words analyzed.

Analysis

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