Good ole scientists
 

so kind and generous, find oldest living animal, then they kill it.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,306076,00.html

How benevolent science is.

Are clams like some hard liquor in that the older they are, the better they are for consumption?

Fox News writing a misleading, anti-science headline? Shocking.

Misleading? So they didn't really kill the clam?

It's more a question of chronology. They dredged a whole bunch of clams, cut them open to study them, and discovered that one of them was super old, a piece of information that isn't possible to obtain without cutting them open.

The headline makes it sound like "hey! this clam is the oldest animal we've ever seen! let's kill it!"

That's now how I understood the headline, but I'm not a left winger.