Sure, if the root post analyzed the study, or even did the most cursory skim of it, and pointed out how the article differed from its conclusions, that would be

Sure, if the root post analyzed the study, or even did the most cursory skim of it, and pointed out how the article differed from its conclusions, that would be valuable. They didn't. They blanket dismissed it, gave their own theory, and expressed how tired they are from this cross they must bear. https://www.unitgraphics.com/deox/IUCNDeoxreportBOOK15-11-2019.pdf https://www.unitgraphics.com/deox/IUCNDeoxreportBOOK15-11-20... (77MB) There's the actual study. The BBC article is pretty accurate in its summary.