Interesting topic but pretty stupid headline.
this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2024
36 points (67.3% liked)
science
14762 readers
554 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.
2024-11-11
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I fell for the click bait.
How many species of anything are there that aren't 100's of thousands years old?
Tons of species of bacteria are merely years or decades old
Technically correct
It's OK, I'm at least 100,000 years old according to this study.
According to this *headline
"That coffee you slurped this morning? It’s 600,000 years old."
Nope.
That is what the news article says, yes. The article doesn't use any quotes around that line, so I assume it isn't from the original research paper.
Yep. My wording wasn't great. But what I meant was "according to how this study was described in the headline."
Science shouldn’t operate on clickbait headlines like this.
Exactly. Science reporting is pretty awful, but in many cases the scientists enable that.
The point of my other facetious comment is that this is not how anyone, scientists included, would define the age of a particular person's coffee. Your coffee was grown and harvested recently. The species can be dated back a half million years. Conflating the plants and the species is misleading at best.
What the actual fuck... and that too from apnews?
Now only if those "researchers" looked even further back, they would have found that ultimate building blocks of any coffee, like electrons and up & down quarks came into existence around 13.8 billion year ago (or may be ~28 billion year ago as claimed by some new research), and our universe may be a part of infinite multiverse that may have existed forever.
So wouldn't it be even bigger headline that coffee has existed forever :)
I thought it tasted funny.
half million years old
🙄
My coffee this morning was brewed fresh and was delicious, thankyouverymuch.