The China Mail - Top science publisher withdraws flawed climate study

USD -
AED 3.672985
AFN 71.737248
ALL 85.950658
AMD 390.130281
ANG 1.80229
AOA 912.000026
ARS 1103.0001
AUD 1.566539
AWG 1.8
AZN 1.702208
BAM 1.702302
BBD 2.018948
BDT 121.497239
BGN 1.709302
BHD 0.376867
BIF 2973.327009
BMD 1
BND 1.3076
BOB 6.909637
BRL 5.7342
BSD 0.999987
BTN 85.137752
BWP 13.660834
BYN 3.269781
BYR 19600
BZD 2.008591
CAD 1.38183
CDF 2875.00011
CHF 0.81794
CLF 0.024825
CLP 952.659896
CNY 7.312301
CNH 7.30941
COP 4295.67
CRC 502.735189
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 96.849973
CZK 21.920958
DJF 177.719858
DKK 6.528181
DOP 59.350217
DZD 132.18013
EGP 51.042272
ERN 15
ETB 133.411258
EUR 0.87423
FJD 2.255402
FKP 0.747304
GBP 0.749449
GEL 2.744986
GGP 0.747304
GHS 15.398613
GIP 0.747304
GMD 70.999899
GNF 8655.500839
GTQ 7.70292
GYD 209.769577
HKD 7.758535
HNL 25.922718
HRK 6.581197
HTG 130.792966
HUF 357.320338
IDR 16842.3
ILS 3.69997
IMP 0.747304
INR 85.18035
IQD 1309.931544
IRR 42112.500973
ISK 126.689813
JEP 0.747304
JMD 158.488661
JOD 0.709302
JPY 141.245957
KES 129.491965
KGS 86.875011
KHR 4015.999576
KMF 429.498448
KPW 900.060306
KRW 1426.729766
KWD 0.305903
KYD 0.833264
KZT 518.59363
LAK 21600.000192
LBP 89550.000231
LKR 299.882933
LRD 199.449837
LSL 18.68031
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 5.434987
MAD 9.21687
MDL 17.104112
MGA 4445.662911
MKD 53.807914
MMK 2099.542767
MNT 3539.927763
MOP 7.989364
MRU 39.617378
MUR 44.510461
MVR 15.399754
MWK 1733.911855
MXN 19.59216
MYR 4.391503
MZN 63.904987
NAD 18.63976
NGN 1606.970045
NIO 36.799937
NOK 10.382495
NPR 136.228529
NZD 1.670825
OMR 0.385024
PAB 0.999839
PEN 3.706018
PGK 4.136947
PHP 56.478973
PKR 280.850196
PLN 3.74815
PYG 8004.943795
QAR 3.645178
RON 4.351031
RSD 102.044102
RUB 81.528233
RWF 1440.663583
SAR 3.751174
SBD 8.326764
SCR 14.520887
SDG 600.50146
SEK 9.541385
SGD 1.310615
SHP 0.785843
SLE 22.774953
SLL 20969.483762
SOS 571.495716
SRD 36.859021
STD 20697.981008
SVC 8.749124
SYP 13001.950927
SZL 18.625399
THB 33.442499
TJS 10.649439
TMT 3.5
TND 2.960793
TOP 2.342099
TRY 38.255901
TTD 6.791625
TWD 32.52494
TZS 2685.000258
UAH 41.584451
UGX 3659.974846
UYU 42.222445
UZS 12908.700818
VES 80.85863
VND 25909
VUV 120.379945
WST 2.787305
XAF 570.906243
XAG 0.030391
XAU 0.000295
XCD 2.70255
XDR 0.709959
XOF 570.936057
XPF 103.802283
YER 245.250461
ZAR 18.598202
ZMK 9001.211953
ZMW 28.472334
ZWL 321.999592
  • BCC

    2.3900

    93.19

    +2.56%

  • RBGPF

    0.1400

    63.59

    +0.22%

  • CMSC

    0.1100

    21.82

    +0.5%

  • CMSD

    0.1900

    22.01

    +0.86%

  • SCS

    0.2440

    9.664

    +2.52%

  • GSK

    0.2350

    36.685

    +0.64%

  • BTI

    0.2500

    42.8

    +0.58%

  • RIO

    1.1200

    59.59

    +1.88%

  • JRI

    0.3980

    12.528

    +3.18%

  • NGG

    1.7650

    74.665

    +2.36%

  • RELX

    1.0550

    53.125

    +1.99%

  • RYCEF

    0.2900

    9.58

    +3.03%

  • BP

    0.8150

    28.895

    +2.82%

  • BCE

    -0.1450

    22.235

    -0.65%

  • VOD

    0.3350

    9.565

    +3.5%

  • AZN

    0.9500

    67.85

    +1.4%

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