CNET65%

The End of August Will Feature a Lunar Eclipse Visible All Over North America 17%

By Joe Hindy63%

8/3/2022, 2:19:29 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Overconfidence Bias, Confirmation Bias, and Appeal to Authority, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 17.1% saturation with 86 hits. Analysis detected 406 faulty-reasoning hits from 503 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 25.4% and a BS Rank of 17% (25,398 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 83.00% of the article peer group.

August is already shaping up to be one of the best months for skygazing in recent memory, and the hits just keep on coming. 
In addition to a planet parade, a meteor shower and a solar eclipse, there is also a lunar eclipse set for the end of August for those in North and South America. 
The eclipse coincides with the full moon, which occurs on the evening of Aug. 
27. 
Per Time and Date, the eclipse begins at 9:23 p.m. 
ET and lasts until 3:01 a.m. 
ET, for a total of about 5 and a half hours. 
The Old Farmer’s Almanac says that August’s full moon peaks in brightness at 12:18 a.m. 
ET on Aug. 28, which means this is all happening at the same time. 
Most of the world gets to see this partial lunar eclipse, but the eastern and central US have the best seats. 
NASA says that about 93% of the moon will be covered, which means you’ll still see a sliver of the moon along with a “rusty, coppery tint” along the edge that’s covered. 
Time and Date bumps that figure up to 96%, so it’s likely somewhere between the two. 
Those in the eastern US and the eastern half of the Midwest will have the best seats in the house for this one. 
People along the Rocky Mountains will have a better view than most, with the West Coast and Alaska getting at least a partial eclipse. 
Unlike solar eclipses, which can be dangerous to view, a lunar eclipse is perfectly safe to watch with the naked eye. 
In fact, using a telescope or binoculars is encouraged so you can see the eclipse more clearly. 
Since it’s not a total lunar eclipse, August’s Sturgeon Moon doesn’t qualify as a blood moon. 
It’s close enough that it’ll certainly look like one, though. 
This is due to the way sunlight interacts with Earth’s atmosphere. 
The atmosphere scatters blue light away, which is known as Rayleigh scattering. 
This leaves only red and orange light to pass through. 
It’s bent by the Earth’s atmosphere and lands on the moon, giving it a reddish appearance. 
The partial lunar eclipse caps off what should be a very active month for sky enthusiasts. 
Somewhat strangely, most of the action takes place over just two days. 
The first day is Aug. 12, which features a planet parade, the peak of the Perseids meteor shower, and for those fortunate enough to be in the path, a solar eclipse that might take place at sunset. 
That’s a lot of activity for just one day. 
You do have 15 days to sleep it off if you want to catch the lunar eclipse on the evening of Aug. 
27. 
This is also the best month of 2026 to view Venus, which is taking a vacation from its spot near the sun, making it much easier to see in the evening after the sun goes down. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 9.9%Joe Hindy: 2.1%CNET: 1.9%Confirmation Bias9.9%This article: 3.2%Joe Hindy: 1.4%CNET: 1.7%Anchoring Bias3.2%This article: 7.4%Joe Hindy: 3.2%CNET: 2.4%Availability Heuristic7.4%This article: 8.7%Joe Hindy: 0.9%CNET: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic8.7%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 1.2%CNET: 0.2%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 11.1%Joe Hindy: 1.5%CNET: 2.0%Overconfidence Bias11.1%This article: 2.0%Joe Hindy: 1.5%CNET: 3.7%Framing Effect2.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 1.1%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 1.0%CNET: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 17.1%Joe Hindy: 2.9%CNET: 3.3%Optimism Bias17.1%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 3.9%CNET: 1.2%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 13.3%CNET: 3.6%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 1.9%CNET: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.9%CNET: 0.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.4%CNET: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.3%CNET: 0.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 1.1%CNET: 3.6%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.1%CNET: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.2%CNET: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.3%Joe Hindy: 4.2%CNET: 3.4%Appeal to Authority9.3%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.8%CNET: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 1.2%CNET: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 4.6%CNET: 4.2%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.3%CNET: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 1.7%CNET: 1.9%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.4%CNET: 0.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 3.1%CNET: 1.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.1%CNET: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.2%CNET: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 1.1%CNET: 4.5%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.1%CNET: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 1.0%CNET: 2.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.7%CNET: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 1.1%CNET: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.2%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 4.2%Joe Hindy: 7.6%CNET: 5.3%Biased Writer Voice4.2%This article: 7.8%Joe Hindy: 0.3%CNET: 1.9%Indoctrination7.8%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Joe Hindy: 0.0%CNET: 10.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

503 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers9.3%attributed speech456writer words
Selected voice

NASA

100%flagged-word coverage
32 attributed words68% of attributed speech66% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Indoctrination-8.6 ptsWriter: 8.6%NASA: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-4.6 ptsWriter: 4.6%NASA: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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