4 ms·

The title sound like they have found an embryo in some sort of permafrost with DNA and everything else.

• 0cVlTeIATBs 5y ago
  It does seem that a creationist argument is that the presence of organic matter in fossils suggests their youth.
• krisoft 5y ago
  It sounds like you have an objection with the term “perfectly preserved”? Words can have different meanings in different contexts. In the context of dinosaurs “perfectly preserved” means that even fine details can be discerned in the fossils. And yes fossils are rocks. Someone who knows the minimal amount about dinos will know this, and even if it’s the first time you encounter the concept the article explains it nicely. Titles are titles. They are short and thus they can’t provide a treatrise on the sum of all human knowledge. You need common sense to parse them.
  • stavros 5y ago
    As a counterpoint, on first read I also thought it was ready to hatch now.
  • amelius 5y ago
    > You need common sense to parse them. The problem is that common sense also depends on context. In this case the target audience is not paleontologists, so the headline should be adjusted.
    • loonster 5y ago
      The picture is directly below it. The picture gives you the context.
      • konart 5y ago
        You can't see the picture unless you click the link though. My point in that the title should be give better information even without the article itself.
        • loonster 5y ago
          That's only true for places like HN. For many places the article is distributed, a picture is common to be included. I have seen another commenter say that the articles shared on social media often include an artist rendition. Those would definitely be clickbait.
  • mkl 5y ago
    I agree with you on "perfectly preserved". > fossils are rocks Not always, especially in paleontology. Any kind of preservation counts, e.g. amber: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil
    • dredmorbius 5y ago
      Strictly speaking, "fossil" means "dug up". That meaning's become confounded with the sense of "fossilised" as in "mineralised", but the original etymology referred to anything dug from the ground, hence coal as a fossil (that is, dug-from-the-Earth) fuel, a nomenclature later passed on to petroleum and natural gas. https://www.etymonline.com/word/fossil https://www.etymonline.com/word/fossil (I'd only discovered this myself recently.)
      • dredmorbius 5y ago
        Oh, and "mineral" is ... stuff that comes from mines. (Etymology is fun.)
    • krisoft 5y ago
      Oh you are right. I totally forgot about amber. Thank you.
  • charcircuit 5y ago
    I think the bigger problem is "preparing to hatch." Rocks don't hatch. It would have to still be alive to hatch.
  • edgyquant 5y ago
    I think the title is fine but they are right I will be seeing this article shared on Facebook in a day or so and people will assume they mean it was preserved as an organism not turned into a rock. I knew what they meant from the title and I’m sure so will most intellectually inclined individuals but there is a huge market of people who eat up pop sci (or their titles at least) articles and it perpetuates fake science even if the article isn’t actually doing that. It’s basically like those articles that say “scientist proves existence of higher dimensions” where everyone who tends to read scientific literature figures they mean “has solved some physics equation using 4 dimensions instead of 3” but the majority who see it only through popsci articles and groups think the scientist has found physical evidence of another universe.
  • konart 5y ago
    >Words can have different meanings in different contexts. Sure. It would be much better to put it as "perfectly preserved fossil" or something like that. I understand that for people who read articles about “perfectly preserved” dinosaurs often this instantly means "fine details can be discerned in the fossils", but for the majority of people who saw the title while scrolling the news feed - this means much more.
• roystonvassey 5y ago
  I've seen this news shared through various forums at least 5-6 times and not once did I think it's an actual dinosaur embryo! Sure, science reporting, especially the headlines in mainstream media, can be much better but I'm not sure that's the case here
  • edgyquant 5y ago
    You didn’t, but millions of people when they see the headline on social media. Still don’t think it’s a bad title though, just would be nice if we could guarantee people read the actual articles when we know most don’t.
    • teh_klev 5y ago
      > You didn't, but millions of people when they see the headline on social media. Then we have a much bigger problem than the headline.
    • loonster 5y ago
      Many clickbait articles include both a clickbait title and a clickbait picture. The picture included in the article gives context to the meaning of perfectly preserved. Many social media platforms allow the picture to be included in post. This article wouldn't be clickbait on one of those. This is only a problem on platforms like HN.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]