The China Mail - Top science publisher withdraws flawed climate study

USD -
AED 3.6725
AFN 68.3669
ALL 83.350198
AMD 382.6682
ANG 1.789783
AOA 917.00025
ARS 1314.487702
AUD 1.555912
AWG 1.80125
AZN 1.703608
BAM 1.678186
BBD 2.013283
BDT 121.620868
BGN 1.684945
BHD 0.377064
BIF 2964
BMD 1
BND 1.286588
BOB 6.907914
BRL 5.471029
BSD 0.999588
BTN 87.180455
BWP 13.450267
BYN 3.366428
BYR 19600
BZD 2.005526
CAD 1.38949
CDF 2864.999947
CHF 0.808299
CLF 0.024749
CLP 970.890023
CNY 7.180399
CNH 7.184305
COP 4036.89
CRC 504.406477
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 95.29708
CZK 21.16455
DJF 177.720188
DKK 6.42775
DOP 62.374954
DZD 129.905026
EGP 48.489905
ERN 15
ETB 141.79002
EUR 0.861051
FJD 2.27385
FKP 0.74349
GBP 0.74515
GEL 2.694997
GGP 0.74349
GHS 11.005026
GIP 0.74349
GMD 71.999893
GNF 8678.496241
GTQ 7.664982
GYD 209.142475
HKD 7.814065
HNL 26.298309
HRK 6.485306
HTG 130.792926
HUF 341.297966
IDR 16351.25
ILS 3.409699
IMP 0.74349
INR 87.323992
IQD 1310
IRR 42049.999918
ISK 123.479867
JEP 0.74349
JMD 160.645258
JOD 0.709021
JPY 148.254962
KES 129.500301
KGS 87.448007
KHR 4005.000148
KMF 422.494464
KPW 900.00801
KRW 1401.159935
KWD 0.30588
KYD 0.833069
KZT 537.332773
LAK 21600.000428
LBP 89555.000063
LKR 301.768598
LRD 201.874989
LSL 17.669959
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 5.425028
MAD 9.020124
MDL 16.829568
MGA 4434.999856
MKD 53.028899
MMK 2098.932841
MNT 3596.07368
MOP 8.045103
MRU 39.969675
MUR 45.740005
MVR 15.409971
MWK 1736.499613
MXN 18.76626
MYR 4.224499
MZN 63.916689
NAD 17.66983
NGN 1536.880254
NIO 36.805843
NOK 10.1804
NPR 139.488385
NZD 1.717903
OMR 0.384494
PAB 0.999631
PEN 3.510291
PGK 4.1435
PHP 57.178495
PKR 281.950424
PLN 3.665303
PYG 7223.208999
QAR 3.64075
RON 4.350903
RSD 100.899018
RUB 80.575028
RWF 1445
SAR 3.752717
SBD 8.220372
SCR 14.714478
SDG 600.498349
SEK 9.62201
SGD 1.288695
SHP 0.785843
SLE 23.292783
SLL 20969.49797
SOS 571.499517
SRD 37.979986
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.35
SVC 8.746316
SYP 13001.955997
SZL 17.670247
THB 32.669981
TJS 9.396737
TMT 3.5
TND 2.891005
TOP 2.342099
TRY 40.936601
TTD 6.774047
TWD 30.498999
TZS 2490.885012
UAH 41.180791
UGX 3563.56803
UYU 40.192036
UZS 12500.000227
VES 137.956902
VND 26432.5
VUV 119.91017
WST 2.707396
XAF 562.893773
XAG 0.02625
XAU 0.0003
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.801636
XDR 0.699543
XOF 562.000287
XPF 102.750477
YER 240.201476
ZAR 17.736755
ZMK 9001.189039
ZMW 23.117057
ZWL 321.999592
  • RIO

    0.6800

    61.3

    +1.11%

  • BTI

    0.2600

    59.27

    +0.44%

  • CMSC

    0.0100

    23.45

    +0.04%

  • BP

    0.1700

    34.05

    +0.5%

  • NGG

    -0.6500

    71.43

    -0.91%

  • RYCEF

    0.2400

    13.99

    +1.72%

  • GSK

    0.0100

    40.08

    +0.02%

  • CMSD

    0.0200

    23.71

    +0.08%

  • AZN

    -0.0600

    80.46

    -0.07%

  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    73.27

    0%

  • VOD

    -0.0400

    11.86

    -0.34%

  • BCC

    0.1700

    84.67

    +0.2%

  • SCS

    -0.0800

    16.1

    -0.5%

  • JRI

    0.0000

    13.33

    0%

  • BCE

    -0.0200

    25.72

    -0.08%

  • RELX

    -0.5000

    48.19

    -1.04%

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