SHOULD scientists ever put a gloss on their data to bolster support for a “good cause”? Growing unhappiness about the Red List – the Oscars of extinction risk – underline why this is bad idea (see “Conservation’s ‘Red List’ is unscientific and often wrong”). Through the list, the International Union for Conservation of Nature has done an admirable job in alerting us to the threat of species loss, but in doing so it omitted to highlight the uncertainty in its findings. As a result, valuable resources may be going into saving the wrong species, and the list itself stands to lose…
To continue reading, today with our introductory offers
Advertisement
More from 91av
Explore the latest news, articles and features
Popular articles
Trending 91av articles
1
Are Neanderthals descendants of modern humans?
2
How autoimmune conditions can unexpectedly drive mental illness
3
Neanderthal infants were enormous compared with modern humans
4
Antioxidant in mushrooms may target uterus cells to ease period pain
5
Collapse of key ocean current may release billions of tonnes of carbon
6
A key solution to climate change isn't happening – and that's good
7
Exclusive report: Inside Chernobyl, 40 years after nuclear disaster
8
Electric vehicle owners could earn thousands by supporting power grid
9
My life as a meteorologist in Chernobyl under Russian occupation
10
Why early humans radically changed their toolkits 200,000 years ago
