Pentagon makes third drop of UFO files including fresh details on unexplained ‘orbs’ 75%

By Ariana Baio0%

6/12/2026, 5:50:10 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Anecdotal, and Recency Bias, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 67.4% saturation with 122 hits. Analysis detected 741 faulty-reasoning hits from 181 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 66.7% and a BS Rank of 75% (5,577 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 74.50% of the article peer group.

The Department of Defense released a third tranche of documents related to UFOs Friday, including several recent recounts of unidentified glowing “orbs” captured on videos by bystanders. 
The newly-released batch of files, contains reports from the CIA, Defense Department, FBI and other intelligence agencies dating back to 1949. 
While some are analyses of flying objects, many are also firsthand accounts of “orbs” or unidentified objects in the sky. 
One report, from July 2025, states that two eyewitnesses saw “an intense bright light” in their backyard and found two “orbs” described as a “brilliant red sphere” that also contained a “white plasma ‘sun.’” 
Pentagon Spokesperson Sean Parnell said the release contained declassified and historical unidentified anomalous phenomena and that the Defense Department was working to release the next batch of files. 
“As the unprecedented levels of interest in both this topic and the Trump administration's historic transparency effort continue, WAR.GOV/UFO has received over 1.7 billion hits worldwide since the site's launch on May 8, 2026,” Parnell added. 
More follows… 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
44.8%
Representativeness Heuristic
11%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
7.2%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
1.1%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
18.8%
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
42%
Primacy Effect
18.8%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
27.1%
False Dilemma
19.9%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
19.9%
Appeal to Emotion
19.9%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
1.1%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
44.8%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
67.4%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
18.8%
Quote-first Misdirection
18.8%
Biased Writer Voice
8.3%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
19.9%

181 words analyzed.

Analysis

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