The China Mail - Top science publisher withdraws flawed climate study

USD -
AED 3.672504
AFN 65.000368
ALL 82.324126
AMD 360.540403
ANG 1.790403
AOA 918.000367
ARS 1546.131265
AUD 1.468645
AWG 1.8
AZN 1.70397
BAM 1.769883
BBD 2.014669
BDT 124.715381
BGN 1.77347
BHD 0.378283
BIF 3011.021908
BMD 1
BND 1.291151
BOB 11.678099
BRL 5.666304
BSD 1.000231
BTN 94.44641
BWP 14.015512
BYN 3.004037
BYR 19600
BZD 2.016692
CAD 1.42705
CDF 2315.000362
CHF 0.837483
CLF 0.025469
CLP 1002.376741
CNY 6.67175
CNH 6.676604
COP 3319.97
CRC 449.312832
CUC 1
CUP 24.064952
CVE 100.150394
CZK 22.139304
DJF 178.554905
DKK 6.782304
DOP 60.996961
DZD 137.215041
EGP 53.502064
ERN 15
ETB 164.576405
EUR 0.90715
FJD 2.27435
FKP 0.756884
GBP 0.755715
GEL 2.590391
GGP 0.756884
GHS 11.72504
GIP 0.756884
GMD 74.000355
GNF 8883.748356
GTQ 7.646644
GYD 209.264655
HKD 7.845704
HNL 26.963306
HRK 6.831965
HTG 131.491813
HUF 331.003504
IDR 18235.4
ILS 3.216704
IMP 0.756884
INR 94.245504
IQD 1520.116116
IRR 1913737.503816
ISK 123.930386
JEP 0.756884
JMD 158.434254
JOD 0.70904
JPY 159.73504
KES 130.050385
KGS 87.435504
KHR 4080.00035
KMF 447.00035
KPW 900.00035
KRW 1335.320383
KWD 0.31147
KYD 0.835579
KZT 446.945163
LAK 22570.87132
LBP 89792.715562
LKR 333.505692
LRD 170.463102
LSL 16.951422
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.463464
MAD 9.936862
MDL 18.213816
MGA 4555.721867
MKD 55.830725
MMK 2099.848767
MNT 3604.365716
MOP 8.103688
MRU 40.552456
MUR 47.620378
MVR 15.403739
MWK 1738.739965
MXN 18.536504
MYR 4.086104
MZN 63.903729
NAD 16.951422
NGN 1343.570377
NIO 36.90298
NOK 9.57248
NPR 151.114437
NZD 1.809464
OMR 0.385095
PAB 1.000231
PEN 3.411802
PGK 4.575679
PHP 63.960375
PKR 277.274459
PLN 3.996535
PYG 6207.891986
QAR 3.64425
RON 4.851904
RSD 106.559038
RUB 82.829047
RWF 1483.467138
SAR 3.82571
SBD 8.097697
SCR 13.874904
SDG 601.503676
SEK 10.075038
SGD 1.287304
SHP 0.752984
SLE 23.050371
SLL 20969.503664
SOS 573.048487
SRD 37.49037
STD 20697.981008
STN 22.225246
SVC 8.773983
SYP 13002.000337
SZL 16.946523
THB 33.875038
TJS 9.249966
TMT 3.5
TND 3.008504
TOP 2.40776
TRY 50.333804
TTD 6.806368
TWD 32.891404
TZS 2655.145825
UAH 45.588969
UGX 4131.053487
UYU 40.541335
UZS 12057.876355
VES 912.87925
VND 25725.5
VUV 120.638016
WST 2.81058
XAF 595.051667
XAG 0.020459
XAU 0.00025782798
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.807139
XDR 0.707052
XOF 595.051667
XPF 108.325037
YER 236.550363
ZAR 16.976255
ZMK 9001.203584
ZMW 20.500748
ZWL 321.999592
SSP 5946.454122
MXV 2.081672
  • RYCEF

    0.4000

    19.71

    +2.03%

  • CMSC

    0.0000

    20.4

    0%

  • BTI

    0.4200

    56.05

    +0.75%

  • BP

    0.2800

    44.43

    +0.63%

  • RBGPF

    1.6000

    67

    +2.39%

  • RIO

    -0.1500

    94.41

    -0.16%

  • AZN

    -0.4300

    166.15

    -0.26%

  • GSK

    0.4600

    49.7

    +0.93%

  • BCE

    -0.4100

    20.56

    -1.99%

  • NGG

    -0.2500

    75.24

    -0.33%

  • VOD

    -0.0400

    16.58

    -0.24%

  • RELX

    -0.4500

    33.07

    -1.36%

  • BCC

    -0.5500

    76.59

    -0.72%

  • CMSD

    -0.0300

    20.27

    -0.15%

  • JRI

    -0.2500

    10.77

    -2.32%

Top science publisher withdraws flawed climate study
Top science publisher withdraws flawed climate study / Photo: © GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA/AFP/File

Top science publisher withdraws flawed climate study

Top science publisher Springer Nature said it has withdrawn a study that presented misleading conclusions on climate change impacts after an investigation prompted by an AFP inquiry.

Text size:

AFP reported in September 2022 on concerns over the peer-reviewed study by four Italian scientists that appeared earlier that year in the European Physical Journal Plus, published by Springer Nature.

The study had drawn positive attention from climate-sceptic media.

The paper, titled "A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming", purported to review data on possible changes in the frequency or intensity of rainfall, cyclones, tornadoes, droughts and other extreme weather events.

Several climate scientists contacted by AFP said the study manipulated data, cherry picked facts and ignored others that would contradict their assertions, prompting the publisher to launch an internal review.

"The Editors and publishers concluded that they no longer had confidence in the results and conclusions of the article," Springer Nature told AFP in an email late Wednesday.

The journal's editors published an online note stating that the paper was retracted due to concerns over "the selection of the data, the analysis and the resulting conclusions".

- Peer-review standards -

It said the paper had been freshly reviewed by experts and the authors invited to submit an addendum in response to the criticisms.

But a review found this "not suitable for publication and that the conclusions of the article were not supported by available evidence or data provided by the authors".

Springer Nature said in its email that the investigation was conducted by its Research Integrity Group in line with guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The paper's authors were identified in order as Gianluca Alimonti, a physicist at a nuclear physics institute; Luigi Mariani, an agricultural meteorologist, and physicists Franco Prodi and Renato Angelo Ricci.

The latter two were named as signatories of the World Climate Declaration, a text that repeated various debunked claims about climate change, an AFP fact check article found.

Their study was "not published in a climate journal," Stefan Rahmstorf, Head of Earth Systems at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, told AFP at the time.

"This is a common avenue taken by 'climate sceptics' in order to avoid peer review by real experts in the field."

Recent studies have indicated that climate misinformation has flourished online as governments push reforms to curb use of the fossil fuels that cause planet-warming carbon emissions.

A further investigation published by AFP in April 2023 showed that sceptics opposed to the scientific consensus on human-caused climate change had got other misleading studies published in peer-reviewed journals.

Experts pointed to widespread concerns about peer-review standards in the lucrative academic publishing industry.

Retraction Watch, a blog that tracks withdrawals of academic papers, counted 5,000 such cases in 2022 -- about a tenth of a percent of the total number of studies published, its co-founder Ivan Oransky told AFP.

Y.Su--ThChM