One of the points of the article is the head/skull usually associated with the Brontosaurus was incorrect, as well as the body being a duplicate.

So with the usual headline sensationalism, it is fair to say "it never existed". More accurately, one could say something like "the dinosaur popularly known as brontosaurus, is actually a aptosaurus with a different head..." But as a headline, it lacks punch.

I was pretty dino crazy (as most kids are, I suppose), and to me, Brontosaurus denotes the animal with the short, massive head that the camarasaurus skull implies, rather than the slender head that the actual Apatosaurus had.

That chimera certainly never existed.