Titles that describe poorly understood scientific phenomena as "bizarre", "mysterious" etc., hurts science, IMO. I would expect this from a journalist (though n

Titles that describe poorly understood scientific phenomena as "bizarre", "mysterious" etc., hurts science, IMO. I would expect this from a journalist (though not excuse it), but an academic? Why not something like "Negative mass dark 'fluid' halos around galaxies as an alternative to dark matter"?