The China Mail - Top science publisher withdraws flawed climate study

USD -
AED 3.672504
AFN 65.000368
ALL 81.910403
AMD 376.168126
ANG 1.79008
AOA 917.000367
ARS 1431.790402
AUD 1.425923
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.70397
BAM 1.654023
BBD 2.008288
BDT 121.941731
BGN 1.67937
BHD 0.375999
BIF 2954.881813
BMD 1
BND 1.269737
BOB 6.889932
BRL 5.217404
BSD 0.997082
BTN 90.316715
BWP 13.200558
BYN 2.864561
BYR 19600
BZD 2.005328
CAD 1.36855
CDF 2200.000362
CHF 0.77566
CLF 0.021803
CLP 860.890396
CNY 6.93895
CNH 6.929815
COP 3684.65
CRC 494.312656
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 93.82504
CZK 20.504104
DJF 177.555076
DKK 6.322204
DOP 62.928665
DZD 129.553047
EGP 46.73094
ERN 15
ETB 155.0074
EUR 0.846204
FJD 2.209504
FKP 0.735067
GBP 0.734457
GEL 2.69504
GGP 0.735067
GHS 10.957757
GIP 0.735067
GMD 73.000355
GNF 8752.167111
GTQ 7.647681
GYD 208.609244
HKD 7.81385
HNL 26.45504
HRK 6.376104
HTG 130.618631
HUF 319.703831
IDR 16855.5
ILS 3.110675
IMP 0.735067
INR 90.57645
IQD 1310.5
IRR 42125.000158
ISK 122.710386
JEP 0.735067
JMD 156.057339
JOD 0.70904
JPY 157.200504
KES 128.622775
KGS 87.450384
KHR 4033.00035
KMF 419.00035
KPW 900.021111
KRW 1463.803789
KWD 0.30721
KYD 0.830902
KZT 493.331642
LAK 21426.698803
LBP 89293.839063
LKR 308.47816
LRD 187.449786
LSL 16.086092
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.314009
MAD 9.185039
MDL 17.000296
MGA 4426.402808
MKD 52.129054
MMK 2100.115486
MNT 3570.277081
MOP 8.023933
MRU 39.850379
MUR 46.060378
MVR 15.450378
MWK 1737.000345
MXN 17.263604
MYR 3.947504
MZN 63.750377
NAD 16.086092
NGN 1366.980377
NIO 36.694998
NOK 9.690604
NPR 144.506744
NZD 1.661958
OMR 0.383441
PAB 0.997082
PEN 3.367504
PGK 4.275868
PHP 58.511038
PKR 278.812127
PLN 3.56949
PYG 6588.016407
QAR 3.64135
RON 4.310404
RSD 99.553038
RUB 76.792845
RWF 1455.283522
SAR 3.749738
SBD 8.058149
SCR 13.675619
SDG 601.503676
SEK 9.023204
SGD 1.272904
SHP 0.750259
SLE 24.450371
SLL 20969.499267
SOS 568.818978
SRD 37.818038
STD 20697.981008
STN 20.719692
SVC 8.724259
SYP 11059.574895
SZL 16.08271
THB 31.535038
TJS 9.342721
TMT 3.505
TND 2.847504
TOP 2.40776
TRY 43.612504
TTD 6.752083
TWD 31.590367
TZS 2577.445135
UAH 42.828111
UGX 3547.71872
UYU 38.538627
UZS 12244.069517
VES 377.985125
VND 25950
VUV 119.620171
WST 2.730723
XAF 554.743964
XAG 0.012866
XAU 0.000202
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.797032
XDR 0.689923
XOF 554.743964
XPF 101.703591
YER 238.403589
ZAR 16.04457
ZMK 9001.203584
ZMW 18.570764
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    0.1000

    82.5

    +0.12%

  • SCS

    0.0200

    16.14

    +0.12%

  • NGG

    1.1700

    88.06

    +1.33%

  • VOD

    0.4900

    15.11

    +3.24%

  • GSK

    1.0600

    60.23

    +1.76%

  • CMSC

    -0.0400

    23.51

    -0.17%

  • RYCEF

    0.2600

    16.88

    +1.54%

  • RELX

    -0.7100

    29.38

    -2.42%

  • RIO

    2.2900

    93.41

    +2.45%

  • BTI

    0.8400

    62.8

    +1.34%

  • CMSD

    0.0600

    23.95

    +0.25%

  • JRI

    0.0900

    12.97

    +0.69%

  • BCC

    1.8700

    91.03

    +2.05%

  • BCE

    -0.4900

    25.08

    -1.95%

  • AZN

    5.8700

    193.03

    +3.04%

  • BP

    0.8400

    39.01

    +2.15%

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