Local family fleeing Autumn Lane Fire was trapped in the middle of Long Lake on Saturday night 39%

By Madison Pearson3%

8/5/2026, 4:33:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Availability Heuristic, and Loss Aversion, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 24.1% saturation with 106 hits. Analysis detected 661 faulty-reasoning hits from 439 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 37.2% and a BS Rank of 39% (18,516 of 30,213 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 61.30% of the article peer group.

The story of the Spokane Complex Fire will never be forgotten by those who lived through it, like Micaela Jaime and her family, who reside in Spokane’s Five Mile Prairie neighborhood and were at Long Lake celebrating her daughter’s 12th birthday around the time the Old Trails Fire started. 
“We got a notification that Five Mile had a level three evacuation and our dog was locked in our house,” she says. 
“We got in our car and tried to go back home to get the dog, but all the roads were closed, so we couldn’t get back up to Five Mile. 
We had some good friends go grab our dog, and we thought we were safe at Long Lake.” 
However, just before 4 pm, the Autumn Lane Fire started just northwest of the Old Trails Fire and directly south of Long Lake, putting Jaime and her family in danger once more. 
“We were sitting out on the patio of my parents’ house and within an instant, the Autumn Fire just blew up on the hillside,” she says. 
“It was just crazy fire everywhere. 
So we just started trying to load up any of our valuables at my parents’ house into our boat.” 
As we reported on Inlander.com on Sunday, Jaime, her husband Matt, her kids and other family members, totaling 15 people, loaded up two boats and headed to the middle of Long Lake just before 7 pm. 
You can see some of the harrowing video of their ordeal here. 
On Aug. 4, the Washington Post picked up the story, with more video, posting it for their national audience. 
“The hillside was engulfed in flames within five minutes. 
Houses were exploding,” Jaime says. 
“All you could hear was explosions everywhere.” 
Jaime says they could feel the heat from the flames from the middle of the lake. 
Ash was falling from above and getting into their eyes. 
Smoke was quickly engulfing them and the hillside was fully ablaze. 
Jaime and her family members remained on their boats in the middle of Long Lake until about 1 am when their friends who live near Tum Tum offered them refuge in a cabin. 
Jaime says their home in Five Mile is thankfully still standing, but many of their neighbors did not share the same fate. 
“We went back up to our house and gathered all of our valuables,” she says. 
“But we’re really just trying to figure out how we can help some of our friends who have lost their places. 
It’s just so devastating.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.2%Madison Pearson: 0.4%inlander.com: 1.6%Confirmation Bias8.2%This article: 7.3%Madison Pearson: 0.1%inlander.com: 0.3%Anchoring Bias7.3%This article: 13.2%Madison Pearson: 1.3%inlander.com: 1.7%Availability Heuristic13.2%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.4%inlander.com: 0.5%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.3%inlander.com: 0.2%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.1%inlander.com: 0.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.5%inlander.com: 1.9%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 11.6%Madison Pearson: 0.2%inlander.com: 0.4%Loss Aversion11.6%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.1%inlander.com: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.1%Madison Pearson: 1.3%inlander.com: 2.3%Optimism Bias4.1%This article: 3.9%Madison Pearson: 0.4%inlander.com: 0.9%Pessimism Bias3.9%This article: 16.9%Madison Pearson: 1.5%inlander.com: 2.9%Negativity Bias16.9%This article: 5.0%Madison Pearson: 0.3%inlander.com: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias5.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.1%inlander.com: 0.0%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 4.8%Madison Pearson: 1.1%inlander.com: 1.0%In-Group Bias4.8%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.1%inlander.com: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.2%inlander.com: 1.4%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.5%Madison Pearson: 0.1%inlander.com: 0.6%Recency Bias7.5%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 4.3%Madison Pearson: 0.8%inlander.com: 1.6%Appeal to Authority4.3%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.3%inlander.com: 0.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.2%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.0%Madison Pearson: 0.3%inlander.com: 2.5%Hasty Generalization5.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.1%inlander.com: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 10.9%Madison Pearson: 1.0%inlander.com: 1.7%Appeal to Emotion10.9%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.3%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 7.3%Madison Pearson: 0.3%inlander.com: 1.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)7.3%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.2%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 24.1%Madison Pearson: 1.5%inlander.com: 1.8%Anecdotal24.1%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 11.4%Madison Pearson: 0.3%inlander.com: 0.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)11.4%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.0%Madison Pearson: 0.2%inlander.com: 0.4%Unattributed Quote5.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.2%inlander.com: 0.3%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.9%inlander.com: 2.9%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.7%inlander.com: 1.2%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 0.0%inlander.com: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Madison Pearson: 1.1%inlander.com: 2.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

439 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers67%attributed speech146writer words
Selected voice

Micaela Jaime

94%flagged-word coverage
274 attributed words94% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Unattributed Quote+8.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Micaela Jaime: 8.0%8.0%

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.