Mystery is the epitome of weasel words. A weasel word obscures rather than clarifying. Something obscure is a mysterious. See also my edit. Another offense to

Mystery is the epitome of weasel words. A weasel word obscures rather than clarifying. Something obscure is a mysterious. See also my edit. Another offense to scientific writing is the antropomorphism. It's actually the scientists who actively suggest the story and they surely wouldn't go for quite as bold a statement. In terms of storytelling we can assume that there's a lot of importance in what isn't said, and that's often achieved by exaggeration of known wrongs, as in sarcasm. Nothing particularly wrong about that, but not terribly scientific. Take away the whole fluff and you have a report about an experimental result with low p-value and the plan to improve it via added reaction mass which is not further explained. That's hardly the mystery, it's a key to the puzzle, maybe. Edit: to elaborate further on the weaselisms. Solutio to mystery kinda annihilates, just like antiparticles and counterparts, so the headline corrected for all would be: Scientists suggest Neutrinos prove Universes Existence. Welp, color me slightly unimpressed. Though I'm complaining on a high level, this is actually super cool just not new to me.