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 ÒÁÈ˾þÃ
Explore the latest news, articles and features
Popular articles
Trending New ÒÁÈ˾þà articles
1
The world's fastest spider tops 3.5 metres per second
2
Babies are born with the neural foundations for maths
3
Where, when and how to watch the 2026 solar eclipse
4
We’ve uncovered a master gene that switches on human development
5
Humans sleep the least of all apes – is it the secret to our success?
6
US government wants to have a useful quantum computer by 2028
7
This physicist is hunting for the biggest black hole in the universe
8
Screwworm could be the first species targeted by an 'extinction drive'
9
Remote-controlled cockroach swarm can now breathe underwater
10
Our verdict on The Selfish Gene: An unpopular piece of popular science



