Why Do People Think Maisie Is Part Dinosaur?

Ever since Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom was released, I've seen a lot of misconceptions about certain plot points featured in the movie. One of the biggest misconceptions I've seen, is the idea that Maisie is part dinosaur.

In the film, it's revealed that the character of Maisie Lockwood is actually a clone of Benjamin Lockwood's deceased daughter. However, some people have come to the conclusion that her being a clone means that she was somehow made with dinosaur DNA, despite the fact that there is no indication of this in the film. Colin Trevorrow has even gone on record to debunk this rumor, stating that she is not part dinosaur and that dinosaur and human DNA will not be mixed in the Jurassic franchise (so in other words, she's a 100% human clone). Despite this, people continue to repeat this false information and try to use it as a way of criticizing not only the film, but the franchise in general, and it's frustrating to say the least. Even when they're called out on this, they either ignore it so they can continue to perpetuate this narrative, or they double down by stating that "The film said she was a clone, so that means she's part dinosaur". When did something being a clone become synonymous with being part dinosaur? With that logic, I guess every clone that's featured in fiction is part dinosaur. Hell, there are real life examples of cloning, so does that mean they're part dinosaur as well? I've seen this "criticism" being brought up constantly (especially now that Dominion is close to being released) and it's just really baffling at this point.

It's ironic that some of these critics accuse the franchise and its audience of being stupid, yet they can't even get the plot points they're criticizing right. Seriously, there's enough issues in Fallen Kingdom that you can actually criticize, without having to make things up.