Out of curiosity, are you religious? Disclosure - I am not, consequently I have no vested interest in either explanation (the article's considered, moderate, s

Out of curiosity, are you religious? Disclosure - I am not, consequently I have no vested interest in either explanation (the article's considered, moderate, science-based proposal, or your knee jerk dismissal). I am confident the authors of the article considered the possibility that the animal(s) never actually went extinct, though the basis for their conclusions seem sound. The journals would be full of wild claims if things not seen for a few decades were deemed to be miraculously rediscovered after each hiatus. That the fossil bones (of the originals) and the skeletal structure (of the new) are similar, but not identical - let alone the submerged island problem - speaks against your claim that they're the same.