CBC Radio49%

Snuffleupagus, a newly described species, is an adorable little predator 15%

By Sheena Goodyear0%

5/21/2026, 3:08:40 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Authority, and Hindsight Bias, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 19.8% saturation with 146 hits. Analysis detected 1,355 faulty-reasoning hits from 739 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 31.2% and a BS Rank of 15% (18,657 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 85.20% of the article peer group.

Scientist David Harasti never had any doubt what he would name the tiny orange creature he first spotted on a diving expedition in Papua New Guinea in 2003. 
But it would take another two decades for Harasti and his colleague Graham Short to find the elusive fish again, study it, and officially designate it a new species. 
Meet <em>Solenostomus snuffleupagus, </em>named<em> </em>after the beloved <em>Sesame Street </em>character, Mr. 
Snuffleupagus. 
&quot;Snuffy for short,&quot; Short, an ichthyologist at the California Academy of Sciences and the Australian Museum, told <em>As It Happens</em> host Nil Kӧksal. &quot;The resemblance was quite uncanny.&quot; 
Short and Harasti have now written a new paper, <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jfb.70497" target="_blank"><u>published in the journal Fish Biology</u></a>, describing <em>S. snuffleupagus</em> as a new species of ghost pipefish that makes its home along coral reefs, and disguises itself as red algae. 
<h2>'The awesome power of natural selection'</h2> 
The fish has quite a few things in common with its namesake  mainly its orange-brown colouring, the long filaments that look like shaggy hair, and its elephant-like snout. 
Milton Love, a marine biologist at the University of California’s Marine Science Institute in Santa Barbara, Calif., says the fish's muppet-like appearance demonstrates &quot;the awesome power of natural selection.&quot; 
&quot;Clearly, all of the morphological features that we find endearing are of some value to the animal,&quot; Love, who was not involved in the research, said in email. 
&quot;Or, and here is another hypothesis, Gaia created this fish after having one too many of those rum drinks that come with those little umbrellas.&quot; 
But its similarity to Snuffleupagus goes deeper than meets the eye. 
It's also extremely elusive, much like Mr. 
Snuffleupagus, who, in his early appearances on <em>Sesame Street</em>, was only ever seen by Big Bird, leading the other characters to mistakenly suspect he was imaginary. 
Harasti and Short tried for years to spot a snuffy fish again after that first 2003 sighting to no avail. 
Their luck changed in 2021 when some scuba diver buddies started seeing the little creatures on the Great Barrier Reef and got in touch. 
The scientists headed to Australia to see for themselves, and on their second dive, they found the fish. 
&quot;It's an understatement to say that we screamed under water,&quot; Short said. &quot;We high-fived, gave each other a hug, and we were just so excited.&quot; 
<h2>An itty-bitty carnivore </h2> 
In order to describe the fish and confirm it as a previously undocumented species, the scientists looked at CT scans of specimens first collected in 1993 during exhibition to far north of Queensland, Australia, in the Torres Strait. 
Short says they were collected alongside several hundred other fish specimens and tucked away until he and his colleague came looking. 
But even back then, he says ichthyologist Helen Larson, who was part of the expedition, suspected it was a new species. 
S. snuffleupagus, like other ghost pipefish, is a cousin of the seahorse. 
Using iNaturalist, the citizen science platform, the scientists confirmed sightings of it in Tonga, Papua New Guinea and New Caledonia, suggesting distribution across the southwestern Pacific. 
And while it may look like Big Bird's beloved bestie, there are a few significant differences between <em>S. snuffleupagus</em> the fish and Snuffleupagus the muppet. 
While Snuffleupagus is famously big  bigger even than Big Bird  <em>S. snuffleupagus</em> is roughly four to five centimetres long, about the size of an airpod. 
And while Snuffleupagus would never harm a fly, <em>S. snuffleupagus</em> is a natural-born killer. 
&quot;They look adorable, very cute. 
They're very delicate and slow moving in the water. 
And it's been assumed that they only eat small crustaceans like small shrimp,&quot; Short said. 
Not so, he says. 
The CT scans found tiny fish skeletons in the specimens' stomachs. 
&quot;Every fish has a role, and they are either eating or being eaten. 
It turns out, ghost pipe fish and in particular, snuffy  they're just like other fish,&quot; Short said. &quot;They're predators.&quot; 
Short says the widespread interest in <em>S. snuffleupagus</em> has been a delight, and he hopes it won't be the last fish he brings attention to. 
He and his colleague already have their eyes on another species of ghost pipe fish that is known to divers around the Pacific, but hasn't been formally described. 
If it works out, they plan to name it after another muppet, but Short wouldn't say which one. 
&quot;Not yet, because I need approval,&quot; he said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 9.6%Sheena Goodyear: 3.4%CBC: 2.6%Confirmation Bias9.6%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.9%CBC: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 10.6%Sheena Goodyear: 3.6%CBC: 3.1%Availability Heuristic10.6%This article: 9.5%Sheena Goodyear: 1.6%CBC: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic9.5%This article: 11.9%Sheena Goodyear: 1.0%CBC: 1.0%Hindsight Bias11.9%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.6%CBC: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 18.4%Sheena Goodyear: 2.9%CBC: 4.2%Framing Effect18.4%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.8%CBC: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.4%Sheena Goodyear: 0.8%CBC: 0.6%Status Quo Bias2.4%This article: 5.5%Sheena Goodyear: 0.3%CBC: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect5.5%This article: 7.6%Sheena Goodyear: 1.9%CBC: 4.0%Optimism Bias7.6%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 1.2%CBC: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%Sheena Goodyear: 4.8%CBC: 5.7%Negativity Bias3.9%This article: 3.4%Sheena Goodyear: 1.2%CBC: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias3.4%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.3%CBC: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.6%CBC: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 3.4%Sheena Goodyear: 0.4%CBC: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias3.4%This article: 8.4%Sheena Goodyear: 2.3%CBC: 3.6%Halo Effect8.4%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.7%CBC: 1.2%Recency Bias7.0%This article: 3.8%Sheena Goodyear: 0.4%CBC: 0.4%Primacy Effect3.8%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.1%CBC: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.3%CBC: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 3.4%Sheena Goodyear: 0.1%CBC: 0.2%Straw Man3.4%This article: 13.1%Sheena Goodyear: 4.3%CBC: 3.7%Appeal to Authority13.1%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.9%CBC: 1.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.5%CBC: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.1%CBC: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.2%Sheena Goodyear: 4.7%CBC: 4.8%Hasty Generalization6.2%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.0%CBC: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.3%CBC: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 19.8%Sheena Goodyear: 4.9%CBC: 4.2%Appeal to Emotion19.8%This article: 3.8%Sheena Goodyear: 0.3%CBC: 0.6%Begging the Question3.8%This article: 6.1%Sheena Goodyear: 2.3%CBC: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.1%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 1.1%Sheena Goodyear: 0.2%CBC: 0.3%Burden of Proof1.1%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.2%CBC: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 1.8%Sheena Goodyear: 0.3%CBC: 0.3%Composition/Division1.8%This article: 3.5%Sheena Goodyear: 4.0%CBC: 3.3%Anecdotal3.5%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 10.0%Sheena Goodyear: 1.5%CBC: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)10.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.0%CBC: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.2%CBC: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.1%CBC: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.8%CBC: 1.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 3.8%Sheena Goodyear: 0.8%CBC: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection3.8%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 1.7%CBC: 4.8%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 1.3%CBC: 2.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.5%CBC: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sheena Goodyear: 0.0%CBC: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 5.4%Sheena Goodyear: 0.7%CBC: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…5.4%

739 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers41%attributed speech435writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageMilton Love • 29 words • 0.0% coverageMilton Love • 28 words • 0.0% coverageMilton Love • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 21 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 5 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 9 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 15 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 13 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 20 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 25 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageGraham Short • 8 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Milton Love

100%flagged-word coverage
82 attributed words27% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -9.2 ptsWriter: 9.2%Milton Love: 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.