It might be easy to brush off my complaint as a case of paleo-pedantry, but word choice matters. "Dinosaur" is a word for a specific group of creatures united by shared characteristics and which had their own evolutionary history—it is not a catch-all term for anything reptilian and prehistoric.
We have known about this distinction for a long time, and I bet that your average 10-year old paleo fan would know not confuse the groups.
Low IQ: crosc looks like dinos so they are the cloests living relative to dinos.
Mid IQ: birds are direct descendents of dinos so they are the closest living relatives to dinos.
High IQ: since birds are direct descendent they are just dinos, not a relative. Which makes crocs the next closest living relative to dinos/birds.
No, the joke is that crocodiles aren't dinosaurs despite looking like them and being around at the same time, just closely related, while birds technically are dinosaurs, just not the big lizards of 64 million years ago.
Statistics is maths, and maths is science insofar that you can't do science without doing maths. And I'd further argue that statistics is perhaps one of the three most important branches of maths to science, the other two being linear algebra and calculus. Also, it's been established previously that maths jokes are definitely welcome here.