It's as though the author went down a rabbit hole of her own curiosity for a couple hours, came up with next to nothing, but had to justify the time spent.
Authors have daily standups too?
The idea has evolved to the point where I'm now estimating quantity of stones and relative size based on seating capacity of the mound.
I won't it even get in to site the entrances towards the east...
My point, I think is that a simple tweaks to earth mound can evolve a complex language by using similar shaped river stones at different scales.
The final result of the first phase will 7 mounds of 3 sizes and one large elevated platform. I realized doing planing the easiest way to communicate my idea to landscapers was to find a stone of each size to use a reference. I could then describe how many of which type go where. before covering with earth.
Once they are done we start to mark celestial events with special stones from far away places to mark the significance...
An article that gives an answer would have said "<insert language> Is The World's Oldest Language."
My suspicion is that we have been clickbait-trained to expect answers when the title is a question. I prefer this structure.
It's the job of reporters to do more than explore a question. Their job is to surface new and useful information for readers, and then prioritize it. And the job of the headline is to telegraph to readers what that information may be, reflecting their priorities.
It is a sign of a failed process of reporting if one can do no more than explore a question, and present a collection of dead ends.
If the reporter can't name the oldest language, then she might write a piece focused on why it's so hard to determine which language is oldest.
Or she might tell the story of how nationalism drives scholars of Chinese, Sanskrit and Tamil to stake the claims they do. There are probably several great stories there.
That is, part of the process of reporting is framing a question that can be answered in a way that allows her to present new and relevant information.
The reporter of this piece, and her editors, did not meet that standard.