Original story is from the Siberian Times: http://siberiantimes.com/ecology/casestudy/news/n0681-now-th...
(the Daily Mail? Seriously?)
(the Daily Mail? Seriously?)
Yet the story is a good one.
> (the Daily Mail? Seriously?)
Reporting quality seems to be good with a lot of images. If the message is good, why criticize the messenger?What makes you say that? Like much of the Daily Mail, it seems to be sensationalised in a way that makes understanding the (probably important) content rather difficult. The headline is incredibly misleading, to start with.