The China Mail - Top science publisher withdraws flawed climate study

USD -
AED 3.672504
AFN 63.502065
ALL 83.129935
AMD 367.929695
ANG 1.790403
AOA 917.510825
ARS 1479.001976
AUD 1.449171
AWG 1.80125
AZN 1.703002
BAM 1.724577
BBD 2.013888
BDT 122.992813
BGN 1.69088
BHD 0.377147
BIF 2984.81535
BMD 1
BND 1.298984
BOB 6.909809
BRL 5.212501
BSD 0.999934
BTN 94.624111
BWP 13.680173
BYN 2.818068
BYR 19600
BZD 2.01104
CAD 1.42306
CDF 2269.000078
CHF 0.812397
CLF 0.023341
CLP 918.649878
CNY 6.7905
CNH 6.81377
COP 3446.19
CRC 455.186766
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 97.22259
CZK 21.3314
DJF 177.720414
DKK 6.5809
DOP 58.613453
DZD 133.491532
EGP 49.606497
ERN 15
ETB 158.649909
EUR 0.880397
FJD 2.26715
FKP 0.758197
GBP 0.75975
GEL 2.640017
GGP 0.758197
GHS 11.199781
GIP 0.758197
GMD 72.495399
GNF 8761.518452
GTQ 7.627362
GYD 209.162776
HKD 7.839898
HNL 26.7202
HRK 6.633503
HTG 130.744947
HUF 313.043501
IDR 17967
ILS 2.987899
IMP 0.758197
INR 94.47035
IQD 1310
IRR 1375050.00053
ISK 126.949859
JEP 0.758197
JMD 157.488647
JOD 0.708979
JPY 161.762995
KES 129.529453
KGS 87.450149
KHR 4017.494974
KMF 433.999843
KPW 900.00035
KRW 1542.304285
KWD 0.30949
KYD 0.833297
KZT 486.623047
LAK 22065.000091
LBP 89549.999851
LKR 337.341005
LRD 182.250303
LSL 16.590249
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.405016
MAD 9.415501
MDL 17.709096
MGA 4224.999805
MKD 54.277663
MMK 2099.539901
MNT 3580.066416
MOP 8.076099
MRU 40.069821
MUR 48.210313
MVR 15.449856
MWK 1736.999969
MXN 17.60321
MYR 4.137983
MZN 63.909993
NAD 16.589831
NGN 1373.859715
NIO 36.610486
NOK 9.83597
NPR 151.394749
NZD 1.770852
OMR 0.384501
PAB 0.999965
PEN 3.421971
PGK 4.38325
PHP 61.409505
PKR 278.049549
PLN 3.77355
PYG 6099.351442
QAR 3.644965
RON 4.609596
RSD 103.362977
RUB 74.875012
RWF 1466
SAR 3.741267
SBD 8.051953
SCR 14.699001
SDG 599.999684
SEK 9.74879
SGD 1.297495
SHP 0.746601
SLE 24.803112
SLL 20969.503664
SOS 571.501729
SRD 37.459634
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.675
SVC 8.749173
SYP 110.532098
SZL 16.590069
THB 33.430162
TJS 9.284423
TMT 3.5
TND 2.937498
TOP 2.40776
TRY 46.49367
TTD 6.780184
TWD 31.815897
TZS 2620.57021
UAH 44.88455
UGX 3689.350352
UYU 39.918699
UZS 12015.000302
VES 620.752985
VND 26335
VUV 118.798432
WST 2.761642
XAF 578.424923
XAG 0.017413
XAU 0.00025
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.802141
XDR 0.716966
XOF 573.000468
XPF 105.498209
YER 238.624983
ZAR 16.558699
ZMK 9001.197731
ZMW 18.024056
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    0.9600

    61.3

    +1.57%

  • RYCEF

    -0.4700

    18.16

    -2.59%

  • CMSC

    -0.0450

    22.065

    -0.2%

  • BCC

    5.8600

    77.66

    +7.55%

  • BCE

    0.1600

    23.2

    +0.69%

  • NGG

    1.2600

    82.83

    +1.52%

  • RIO

    -1.5500

    94.03

    -1.65%

  • RELX

    -0.0600

    31.15

    -0.19%

  • CMSD

    0.0600

    22.02

    +0.27%

  • VOD

    -0.2400

    13.81

    -1.74%

  • JRI

    -0.0600

    12.57

    -0.48%

  • BP

    -1.4700

    37.86

    -3.88%

  • GSK

    -0.9800

    51.09

    -1.92%

  • BTI

    0.6500

    61.39

    +1.06%

  • AZN

    2.0000

    183.02

    +1.09%

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