Futurism90%

Trump Decimated a Satellite Program That Would’ve Vastly Improved Wildfire Smoke Monitoring 81%

By Joe Wilkins90%

7/17/2026, 8:45:35 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Loss Aversion, and Appeal to Authority, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 39.7% saturation with 171 hits. Analysis detected 1,103 faulty-reasoning hits from 431 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 73.2% and a BS Rank of 81% (3,410 of 17,361 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 80.40% of the article peer group.

When Donald Trump, Elon Musk and the DOGE boys started snipping wires across DC, they took out critical programs like the government’s premier climate research website and the hurricane-hunter aircraft gathering data on dangerous storms. 
While they were at it, the Trump administration also ripped up a project that would have vastly improved the country’s ability to monitor wildfires. 
The GeoXO program was a project originally encompassing six satellites that would greatly improve the resolution available to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to monitor atmospheric conditions like wildfire smoke, as well as weather events like lightning strikes, and climate observations such as color changes in the ocean’s surface. 
The six satellites were meant to encompass three regions split between the US West, Central, and East. 
Starting in April 2025, however, the Trump administration directed the NOAA to make drastic cuts to GeoXO. 
These included cutting two satellites from the mission altogether  scrapping the central observation region entirely  and canceling major contracts for existing GeoXO instruments. 
The purported goal was to refocus the program on a “core weather mission,” as opposed to long-term climate monitoring, following the administration’s broader attacks on any effort to mitigate or even mention climate change. 
One of those cancelled instruments, the GeoXO Atmospheric Composition device, was a high-resolution spectrometer designed to give the NOAA advanced capabilities to monitor air pollutants, like ozone, nitrogen dioxide, formaldehyde, and excess particulate matter. 
In the long term, the tool would have helped scientists paint a clearer picture of how particular weather events relate to broader climate shifts, an NOAA report explains. 
Of course, the timing of the cancellation couldn’t have been worse. 
Huge swaths of the United States and Canada are currently being smoked out by noxious fumes emanating from hundreds of wildfires across North America. 
Though the GeoXO program wouldn’t have gone live until the 2030s, Trump’s decision represents a devastating loss for our future ability to monitor this exact phenomenon, which is becoming something of an annual tradition for millions of people. 
As Susan Anenberg, chair of environmental and occupational health at George Washington University observed , the NOAA “had spent years planning an air pollution instrument on the GeoXO satellite which would provide near-real-time, location-specific data on smoke levels, giving people the information they need to avoid exposure.” 
Anenberg explained that the public health benefits this kind of monitoring would provide “could amount to about $13 billion per year.” 
“As smoke events happen more often,” Anenberg continued, “we need more data, not less.” 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
13.7%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
8.8%
Overconfidence Bias
4.9%
Framing Effect
8.4%
Loss Aversion
20.2%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
11.6%
Pessimism Bias
5.8%
Negativity Bias
34.1%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
7.9%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
7.9%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
8.8%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
8.1%
Straw Man
5.6%
Appeal to Authority
17.4%
False Dilemma
11.1%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
2.8%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
5.6%
Begging the Question
2.6%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
8.8%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
10.9%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
8.1%
Biased Writer Voice
39.7%
Indoctrination
3.2%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

431 words analyzed.

Analysis

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