Of punctuation and time capsules

This...is funny, in a way. Or maybe not so funny. You be the judge.

I was reading this article when I saw this sentence placed prominently on the page (just scroll through the page and you will spot the sentence)

"This extraordinary finding is like Pompeii, according to Dr. Hermann Pfefferkorn, a time capsule."

This sentence is actually saying that the dear Dr. Pfefferkorn is a time capsule. *gasp*

The actual sentence in the article reads:
This extraordinary finding "is like Pompeii", according to University of Pennsylvania paleobotanist Hermann Pfefferkorn, who characterized it as "a time capsule."

To mean the same thing as in the article, the blown-up sentence should be:
"This extraordinary finding is like Pompeii," according to Dr. Hermann Pfefferkorn, "a time capsule."

I think that is already correct (or at least the meaning would not be distorted), but it would be even better as:
"This extraordinary finding is like Pompeii," according to Dr. Hermann Pfefferkorn. "A time capsule."

Because we seldom have two dialogue phrases "wrapping" the speaker's name in a sentence. It kinda looks untidy to me. But then it would mean that the Dr. actually said those words, which doesn't seem to be the case. So the solution would be to use the same quote marks as in the article itself:
This extraordinary finding "is like Pompeii", according to Dr. Hermann Pfefferkorn. "A time capsule".

But in this case "a time capsule" seems to be floating. (but anything is better than calling someone a time capsule, I think :P )

So many different ways of putting the punctuation marks, and even if the basic meaning is there, the nuances change. NOW do you see the importance of punctuation? Calling a Dr. a time capsule, indeed!