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 New ¾«¶«´«Ã½
Explore the latest news, articles and features
Humans
The story of the first human tool: the humble container
Comment
Technology
Can floating data centres meet AI's huge energy demand?
Analysis
Physics
Where did the laws of physics come from? I think I've found the answer
Features
Humans
Huge study of ancient British DNA reveals only minor Roman influence
News
Popular articles
Trending New ¾«¶«´«Ã½ articles
1
Where did the laws of physics come from? I think I've found the answer
2
Huge study of ancient British DNA reveals only minor Roman influence
3
The mathematician who doesn’t exist
4
There has been a sudden increase in the rate of sea level rise
5
Man destined for Alzheimer's may have been saved by accidental therapy
6
US government releases huge batch of UFO files
7
Red-light therapy does have health benefits but not the ones you think
8
Neanderthal 'kneeprint' found next to mysterious stalagmite circle
9
The greatest David Attenborough documentaries you really need to watch
10
Woman in cancer remission without treatment in highly unusual case
