That took me a few parsings. At first I thought they meant a researcher had continued working around the glacier for 66 years, unaware that the world had moved on.

Yeah, it’s a muddled headline.

Good article though.

And a much clearer version only needs two more words:

Remains of Antarctic researcher, who worked for Falklands’ Dependency 66 years ago, found in receding glacier

I agree that it was a good article, though. Editors must have to take a class in headline obstruction.

Edit: maybe I’m wrong; there are many better headlines about this story. The one OP found is uniquely bad:

• Remains of British researcher lost in 1959 recovered from Antarctic glacier
• Melting ice reveals remains of Antarctic researcher who vanished 66 years ago
• Body of Antarctic researcher found 66 years after he disappeared exploring glacier
• Remains of U.K. researcher who vanished in 1959 found on Antarctic glacier: “Shocked and amazed”
• Remains of a Lost Antarctic Researcher Are Finally Recovered, 66 Years After He Fell Into a Crevasse
• After 66 Years, Melting Glacier Releases Antarctic Researcher’s Remains
• Lost researcher’s remains found on Antarctic glacier after 66 years
• Remains Of Antarctic Researcher Lost During 1959 Expedition Found After 65 Years