They have had these traits for 100 million years for heaven's sake, how can you say that this is makes the reporter's statement that '"because since the reign of the dinosaurs, about 100 million years ago, army ants in essence have not changed a bit"."
Could I have that question again in a way that makes sense, please?
If you meant to write, "how can I say that this makes the reporter's statement *inaccurate*", it's because there's a vast difference between, "three particular traits have persisted" for 100 million years, as compared to, "the ants have not changed A BIT" over the same period.
Example for the dim: While it's accurate to say that I still have a nose, fingers, and knees (three particular traits) after the 40+ years of life since my birth, it's *not* accurate to say that my body "hasn't changed a bit" over the same period.
Do you have a problem with reading comprehension or what????
No, not at all -- which is why I can recognize and point out the great difference between what the study said, and what the press release said.
I find it amazing that you *can't*. Or that you pretend you can't. Neither option inspires confidence.