iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Reposted by Doc Fancy

To be fair, no one has ever seen us in the same room at the same time

Reposted by Doc Fancy

Tom Cox @dj-acid-reflux.bsky.social · 7h

You can deny this is true, but ask yourself... Who was it who first got you into Pentangle and early Funkadelic? Who introduced you to Faust and Charles Mingus and Linda Perhacs and Cher's cover of 'Walk On Gilded Splinters'? Was it a dog? No, it was a cat you met under a dank bridge.

1618

Reposted by Doc Fancy

The Bee Guy @thebeeguy.bsky.social · 8h

You’ve been seeing very large #bumblebees on the wing for the past while. Why? Okay I’ll tell you why in this quick thread if you promise to #repost as the more people who know that these are queens the more likely that someone will help some out meaning more colonies next year. Deal? 1/15 #bees

6233154

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 03/10/2026

Recently had a colleague say, "your emails are so dense!" and, well, that's true. I am not pithy. This is evident. But also I hate repeating myself and I don't want people to have to ask questions and have more back and forth if that's not necessary. I do at least try to make them readable!

020

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 03/10/2026

Me: "Saturday! sleep-in! lazy morning! Now to hammer out a couple of emails." *proceeds to email colleagues locally and internationally regarding a couple of projects* Me: "Sweet, one quick task done-- WHAT THE FUCK, IT'S AFTER 2PM, ARE YOU SERIOUS?!" ...science emails are not quick.

130

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 03/10/2026

the english major within …who did a subject in undergrad on Gothic Fictions, for which she submitted a frankly banger essay (if I do say so myself)on Dracula and Buffy… …is having a Moment™️.

000

Reposted by Doc Fancy

John Leavitt @leavittalone.bsky.social · 02/10/2026

One of the reasons Dracula works and is good is cause it’s about every single middle-class British neurosis and paranoia AT ONCE

424342

Reposted by Doc Fancy

Kat Tenbarge @kattenbarge.bsky.social · 03/10/2026

Nicole is a leading expert on the issue of campus sexual violence. I am floored that USA Today would do this to her. I find this kind of journalistic behavior unethical and morally reprehensible, twisting an interview with a renowned advocate for survivors into a hit piece against a survivor.

131616447

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

I did not know how much I needed this in my life

150

Reposted by Doc Fancy

Callan Bentley @callanbentley.bsky.social · 30/09/2026

Digging into etymology today... ⚒️

Whiteboard sketch of the Egyptian tam's headed God Ammon and a fossil ammonite

1336

Reposted by Doc Fancy

Angry Rutabaga @streamlass.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

Thread, up, of interestingly petty historical correctness!

151

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

But now I get to email the NBDL people and say, "so, I've figured out what those anomalous results mean..." I don't get to say "BOOM" and "FUCK YEAH" to them, though. soooo if you read my nerdy nonsense, thank you! I am so relieved to have figured that out. Think ocean thoughts, -Doc out

020

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

and-- and-- and... sigh. There was no one in the lab to be even peripherally impressed. There are maybe four people that I know that I could babble to about feather stars, and only two who would be excited by the taxonomic problem solving, and they are both on other continents.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

and I felt like a WIZARD HERO TAXONOMIST, because all the pieces fell into place, and I had taken three specimens of "Fariometra" - which seemed like a dumping ground genus for species described from fragmentary or baffling specimens - and untangled the knotted skein of species names.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

And I knew the remaining Mystery Critter was more closely related to that first Mystery Critter - but it was weird looking in one key aspect. So I poked around that section of the monograph for a while and then found that one, as well. Thaumatometra tenuis. FUCK YEAH.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

Even better, that was the one that had three critters in the jar, so now I can send off two more tissue samples and then we've got that species sorted as well! (mostly we're funded to pick one species per genus, and this is one we didn't have before, so that's neat.)

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

But buried in the species descriptions, I find:"oh the first pinnule isn't as long in this specimen but it's the same species." well why did you leave pinnule length in the key, then?! Every other character matched, including depth and distribution. Thaumatometra abyssorum. BOOM.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

It doesn't help that so many of these species rely on the presence of structures that literally just fucken fall off at the drop of a hat, let alone being hauled up 1000 to 2000m in a trawl net. "Cirri with more than 25 segments." What cirri. There are none. The cirri are a lie.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

The other two? Oh god. That was... a time. That was going through numerous lengthy species descriptions, checking type specimen photos (if they happened to exist, they don't all exist, in fact most don't), and just getting stuck on "what the fuck is that thing" (the essential taxonomic question)

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

They were all different, genetically. Quite different. Related, but absolutely not the same species. Me: *shoves them under a microscope* Me: "...WELL YES THESE ARE DIFFERENT." (which I can declare, because I am not currently at sea. That helps. I have time to mull it over.)

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

(we are asked to provide tissue from 2-3 specimens of the same species in order to account for some natural variation in the species' genome, and there are quite a few species where we only have ONE in the collection, so I got excited to find three. Well. Technically five, one jar had three in it.)

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

I figured out that one of them was exactly what it said on the label - and by the number, it's the one he got to first, and then when the others turned up, he used that name as a placeholder. Which I, a couple years later, did not realise, and thought "oh hey, three of the same species, cool!"

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

But I'd gotten through three of the four conflicts so far, some of which were *rather convoluted*, and then I was left with... ...very small deep-sea antedonids (a confusing family of mostly very small feather stars. It is a mess).

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

Also these are odd, difficult groups. I have had to correct a bunch of my own misidentifications, it's just that I got to do that before I sent the tissues off. So: no shade. The problem is that it's not enough to say what something is *not* if you can't also say what it is. Look- might happen.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

...and also prior to all the type specimen photos going up on the World Register of Marine Species. So you'd go through the species key and think "okay, seems legit, missing one character but best I got, SHIT THE TRAWL'S COMING UP." Based on descriptions from the first half of last century.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

Mostly: "these three are supposed to be the same species, but this lands in a different genus - you're the expert, please explain?" So far, this has been down to misidentification of weird deep-sea critters by people who were doing the IDs while still at sea.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

The other problem I had yesterday was that I FINALLY resolved a taxonomic conundrum - we got the first round of data back from a national genome sequencing project, and I've been responsible for selecting the crinoid species for that and sampling tissues. Specialists are asked to resolve conflicts.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

The problem with being a specialist nerd - as all specialist nerds will know - is that sometimes you come up with a phrase you find vastly entertaining, and it will entertain 5 other people, max. globally. Today's was "as we know, echinoderms can't osmoregulate their way out of a salty paper bag."

120

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

Anyways, this is why Bsky is the outlet where I can call him Douchebag McDunning-Kruger. …which entertains me enormously, ngl 😅

010

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

That’s why “blocking” on iNat is so weak sauce. It undermines the purpose of the platform. And the platform has become incredibly important for monitoring populations (not quantifiably, but presence/absence data. Well. Presence data) and disease. But I am considering submitting another complaint.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

He knows just enough to sound like he’s competent. The other thing is that — the way iNat works — is that IDs get knocked back to genus if people disagree on species. In order to get a robust record that synchronises to larger databases — which is what I want! — I need to convince others.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 29/09/2026

No, he’s doing it to artificially gain credibility and sell his shitty book. Believe me, I want to mock him to hell and back, but *I* lose credibility in this context if I do. The only reason I respond (usually I don’t) is that I desperately don’t want all my keen nerds believing his nonsense.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

PS my hope is that the rant is at least entertaining! But I’d like to get back to enthusiastic nerding out. So if anyone DOES want to know about distributional weirdness on the world’s longest temperate coastline… lmk.

000

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

Anyways. I am a bit under the weather today, but not contagious, so I am going into the museum to address my increasing stack of scientific tasks. Be safe, be wise, be kind, and for the love of god, don’t buy print-to-order field guides! -Doc out 👩‍🔬 🔥 ⭐️

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

I am so tired of dudes like this. But hey, if I ever revise that genus in question, it definitely won’t be the first taxonomic revision motivated by spite. I’ll be part of a grand scientific tradition!

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

That is the correct approach. But this guy is using it as his grift and his narcissistic supply. And he is being so demonstrably, confidently wrong. And still I am having to go into the export and manually correct his errors so that my data on an actual fucking disease outbreak is correct.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

It matters which species are impacted. It matters how the disease presents in different species with different levels of calcification. It matters where those species are. Every single individual in that project has had their ID validated by me. If I can’t tell, I knock it back to genus.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

I’m not even starting on his inability to count spines. But the reason this shit matters is… look. I took a break from iNat because I was so tired of some wanker crashing around in my field of expertise and shitting all over it. I was on iNat looking for evidence of Sea Star Wasting Disease.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

And it ruins the really nice exchange I was having with the person I identified the specimen for. But there is no winning with people like this. The only reason — the ONLY reason — I responded at all is because I don’t want the original poster to fall for his nonsense. It’s not fair to them.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

Anyways, I have now linked the record of Nectria saoria from Inverloch, and made the statement that I won’t engage further because it won’t be productive. Which I hate doing. I’m aware that it makes me look like an asshole. I’m aware that it means he spouts off after I’m done and I can’t reply.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

And it’s just exhausting. It’s ridiculous. The guy is still spewing his nonsense and selling his shitty print to order field guide full of ridiculous nonsense, and once again destabilising my IDs and the work that I do. (Do not — EVER — order a print-to-order field guide.)

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

Meanwhile: “This other species [that this is not] has been reported from this location—“ So? I mean, looking at the map, *I’ve* been reported from that location. (Well. Nearby.) “—so it’s that.” Good fucking god, I’ll take “logical fallacies for a kick in the face,” Alex.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

And still I get “this species hasn’t been recorded from Victoria.” I’m checking my taxonomist starfish nerd Australian field guide, written by actual experts, and the distribution very clearly includes Victoria. With a pained sigh, I open up ALA, and search. Boom. East of Melbourne.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

In a desperate bid to at least try to nudge him onto a path of *doing less damage*, I explained about Atlas of Living Australia: a CSIRO-developed platform that links all our major natural history collections. So. I *told* him how to find validated distributional data. Months ago.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

(seriously, if he weren’t such a colossal dickbag, I’d have sympathy. I know what it’s like to lack access to scientific resources. The correct solution, however, is collaboration, and I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that he doesn’t wanna dilute his genius! Oh, also no one will work with him…)

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

You need to validate this sort of thing with physical specimens. Of course Douchebag McDunningKruger doesn’t like that, because he doesn’t have access to physical specimens, because he’s on the other side of the world and not actually affiliated with a museum or university. Sucks for him.

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

And likewise, you can say that species A is, say, yellow, and never notice that species B is also yellow because you’ve been identifying all the yellow things as species A. Bonus if species A is more likely to get good photos (maybe found in rockpools as well). See the problem?

100

Doc Fancy @docfancy.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

So I cracked, and I explained all this. I explained that it’s otherwise possible to establish a feedback loop where you only ID species A from location X because species B hasn’t been recorded there, even if species B has been recorded not too far away.

100