The China Mail - Top science publisher withdraws flawed climate study

USD -
AED 3.672502
AFN 66.272138
ALL 83.49892
AMD 382.462203
ANG 1.789982
AOA 917.000222
ARS 1406.911304
AUD 1.533966
AWG 1.805
AZN 1.701199
BAM 1.689676
BBD 2.011145
BDT 121.87473
BGN 1.689676
BHD 0.373737
BIF 2940.647948
BMD 1
BND 1.300389
BOB 6.909719
BRL 5.334399
BSD 0.998531
BTN 88.502808
BWP 13.406479
BYN 3.40311
BYR 19600
BZD 2.008207
CAD 1.40302
CDF 2149.999776
CHF 0.806225
CLF 0.024015
CLP 942.090228
CNY 7.11935
CNH 7.122165
COP 3780.3
CRC 501.339093
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 95.261339
CZK 21.03101
DJF 177.814255
DKK 6.46169
DOP 64.155508
DZD 129.316631
EGP 47.012697
ERN 15
ETB 154.143499
EUR 0.86534
FJD 2.28425
FKP 0.760233
GBP 0.760575
GEL 2.705011
GGP 0.760233
GHS 10.919222
GIP 0.760233
GMD 73.00004
GNF 8667.818575
GTQ 7.651836
GYD 208.907127
HKD 7.77563
HNL 26.25486
HRK 6.51898
HTG 132.907127
HUF 332.810054
IDR 16669
ILS 3.24347
IMP 0.760233
INR 88.63935
IQD 1308.077754
IRR 42099.999599
ISK 126.703233
JEP 0.760233
JMD 160.267819
JOD 0.708964
JPY 153.946992
KES 129.209843
KGS 87.450129
KHR 4019.006479
KMF 421.000235
KPW 900.018268
KRW 1456.145008
KWD 0.306901
KYD 0.832138
KZT 524.198704
LAK 21680.345572
LBP 89418.488121
LKR 304.354212
LRD 182.332613
LSL 17.296674
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 5.452268
MAD 9.256069
MDL 17.024622
MGA 4488.12095
MKD 53.153348
MMK 2099.87471
MNT 3580.787673
MOP 7.998963
MRU 39.553348
MUR 45.90988
MVR 15.405027
MWK 1731.490281
MXN 18.43226
MYR 4.166996
MZN 63.950265
NAD 17.296674
NGN 1435.23005
NIO 36.742981
NOK 10.152799
NPR 141.60432
NZD 1.775568
OMR 0.38114
PAB 0.998618
PEN 3.369762
PGK 4.215983
PHP 58.947013
PKR 282.349719
PLN 3.670117
PYG 7065.226782
QAR 3.639309
RON 4.401198
RSD 101.226782
RUB 81.085876
RWF 1450.885529
SAR 3.750401
SBD 8.230592
SCR 13.701253
SDG 600.496076
SEK 9.533875
SGD 1.302655
SHP 0.750259
SLE 23.195989
SLL 20969.499529
SOS 570.62635
SRD 38.59899
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.166307
SVC 8.736933
SYP 11056.858374
SZL 17.302808
THB 32.350499
TJS 9.216415
TMT 3.51
TND 2.95162
TOP 2.342104
TRY 42.23858
TTD 6.768898
TWD 31.015797
TZS 2456.415026
UAH 41.870929
UGX 3494.600432
UYU 39.766739
UZS 12042.332613
VES 228.194001
VND 26306
VUV 122.303025
WST 2.820887
XAF 566.701512
XAG 0.020379
XAU 0.000247
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.799568
XDR 0.704795
XOF 566.701512
XPF 103.032397
YER 238.501498
ZAR 17.28389
ZMK 9001.203851
ZMW 22.591793
ZWL 321.999592
  • RYCEF

    0.0800

    14.88

    +0.54%

  • CMSD

    0.0900

    24.1

    +0.37%

  • SCS

    0.0000

    15.76

    0%

  • NGG

    1.4600

    77.75

    +1.88%

  • RBGPF

    -0.7800

    75.22

    -1.04%

  • CMSC

    0.0700

    23.85

    +0.29%

  • BCC

    -0.0900

    70.64

    -0.13%

  • JRI

    -0.0100

    13.74

    -0.07%

  • RIO

    0.0600

    69.33

    +0.09%

  • RELX

    -1.1200

    42.27

    -2.65%

  • BCE

    0.0200

    23.19

    +0.09%

  • VOD

    0.2400

    11.58

    +2.07%

  • GSK

    -0.4700

    46.63

    -1.01%

  • BTI

    0.3800

    54.59

    +0.7%

  • AZN

    0.8100

    84.58

    +0.96%

  • BP

    0.7600

    36.58

    +2.08%

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