The China Mail - Top science publisher withdraws flawed climate study

USD -
AED 3.672979
AFN 71.999778
ALL 86.04958
AMD 389.46012
ANG 1.80229
AOA 915.510487
ARS 1195.037896
AUD 1.53907
AWG 1.8
AZN 1.70394
BAM 1.726473
BBD 2.018715
BDT 121.474537
BGN 1.722639
BHD 0.376943
BIF 2932.5
BMD 1
BND 1.289653
BOB 6.934176
BRL 5.714297
BSD 0.999823
BTN 84.340062
BWP 13.557616
BYN 3.272024
BYR 19600
BZD 2.008395
CAD 1.377375
CDF 2870.999959
CHF 0.825195
CLF 0.02447
CLP 939.040037
CNY 7.21705
CNH 7.20175
COP 4302.61
CRC 505.826271
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 97.375031
CZK 21.994602
DJF 177.720145
DKK 6.57734
DOP 58.849968
DZD 132.393124
EGP 50.672301
ERN 15
ETB 131.949642
EUR 0.881505
FJD 2.24925
FKP 0.752905
GBP 0.748875
GEL 2.745003
GGP 0.752905
GHS 13.525032
GIP 0.752905
GMD 70.99983
GNF 8655.501853
GTQ 7.696959
GYD 209.181714
HKD 7.751265
HNL 25.89917
HRK 6.6433
HTG 130.677931
HUF 356.504035
IDR 16439
ILS 3.600455
IMP 0.752905
INR 84.79365
IQD 1310
IRR 42112.498718
ISK 129.249549
JEP 0.752905
JMD 158.432536
JOD 0.709204
JPY 142.913981
KES 129.500959
KGS 87.450448
KHR 4017.999924
KMF 433.502922
KPW 899.982826
KRW 1384.80062
KWD 0.30659
KYD 0.833249
KZT 514.459746
LAK 21620.000433
LBP 89549.999997
LKR 299.447821
LRD 199.649899
LSL 18.187686
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 5.476767
MAD 9.236969
MDL 17.131961
MGA 4440.000072
MKD 54.271601
MMK 2099.669739
MNT 3574.896063
MOP 7.980791
MRU 39.562865
MUR 45.279753
MVR 15.410148
MWK 1735.999879
MXN 19.65337
MYR 4.232503
MZN 63.900104
NAD 18.20123
NGN 1606.590227
NIO 36.749599
NOK 10.26585
NPR 134.943503
NZD 1.663824
OMR 0.385002
PAB 0.999828
PEN 3.66442
PGK 4.06775
PHP 55.419917
PKR 281.254077
PLN 3.766755
PYG 8004.731513
QAR 3.641012
RON 4.483701
RSD 103.146038
RUB 81.500513
RWF 1419.762623
SAR 3.750909
SBD 8.357828
SCR 14.231144
SDG 600.503435
SEK 9.57895
SGD 1.28864
SHP 0.785843
SLE 22.730318
SLL 20969.483762
SOS 571.496579
SRD 36.850164
STD 20697.981008
SVC 8.748003
SYP 13001.95156
SZL 18.194996
THB 32.660008
TJS 10.373192
TMT 3.5
TND 2.999598
TOP 2.342102
TRY 38.637715
TTD 6.77616
TWD 29.992602
TZS 2697.499662
UAH 41.425368
UGX 3657.212468
UYU 41.939955
UZS 12945.000116
VES 88.61243
VND 25963.5
VUV 120.703683
WST 2.766267
XAF 579.065754
XAG 0.030227
XAU 0.000295
XCD 2.70255
XDR 0.72166
XOF 576.000104
XPF 105.250218
YER 244.502481
ZAR 18.207265
ZMK 9001.200677
ZMW 27.020776
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    3.2400

    66.24

    +4.89%

  • RYCEF

    -0.0300

    10.39

    -0.29%

  • CMSD

    0.0500

    22.31

    +0.22%

  • SCS

    -0.1000

    9.87

    -1.01%

  • CMSC

    0.0400

    22.06

    +0.18%

  • RIO

    0.2300

    59.8

    +0.38%

  • GSK

    -1.3500

    37.5

    -3.6%

  • BTI

    0.8100

    44.56

    +1.82%

  • AZN

    -1.8300

    70.26

    -2.6%

  • NGG

    0.4600

    72.3

    +0.64%

  • RELX

    -0.1100

    54.93

    -0.2%

  • JRI

    0.0000

    13.05

    0%

  • VOD

    0.0700

    9.67

    +0.72%

  • BCE

    0.2000

    21.59

    +0.93%

  • BCC

    -4.9900

    87.48

    -5.7%

  • BP

    -0.7800

    28.4

    -2.75%

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