Top science publisher withdraws flawed climate study
Aug 2023, phys.org
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number of studies published, its co-founder Ivan Oransky told AFP.Top science publisher Springer Nature said it has withdrawn a climate change study byfour Italian scientists* in the European Physical Journal Plus, published by Springer Nature, because it manipulated data, cherry picked facts and ignored others that would contradict their assertions. The study had drawn positive attention from climate-skeptic media.The paper had been freshly reviewed and found "not suitable for publication and that the conclusions of the article were not supported by available evidence or data provided by the authors".
*Notice it says here that the Italian scientists and not climate scientists. The four experts writing a climate science paper are in fact three physicists and an agricultural meteorologist, two of whom are also signatories on the World Climate Declaration, a text that "repeated various debunked claims about climate change". Furthermore, the study was not published in a climate journal; "This is a common avenue taken by 'climate skeptics' in order to avoid peer review by real experts in the field."
via Agence France-Presse AFP: Gianluca Alimonti et al, RETRACTED ARTICLE: A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming, The European Physical Journal Plus (2022). DOI: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02243-9
Post Script: (To explain the rise of article fraud) "Experts pointed to widespread concerns about peer-review standards in the lucrative academic publishing industry." And one has to ask, why is the academic publishing industry so lucrative in the first place? (And one has to answer with a chart showing the amount of money that goes into government lobbying or overall public psychological operations campaigns by big business such as Big Oil's Climate Footprint (climate change is your fault), Big Tobacco's Throat Soothing (smoking is good for a sore throat), Big Dairy's Drink Milk (regardless of whether you're lactose tolerant or not), Big Tech's Move Fast Break Things (including federal safety regulations and basic human rights), or you name it.
Controlling people's thoughts is a lucrative business, that's why.
Post-Post: I watched the movie Andromeda Strain, was impressed by the scientific credibility of the premise (and the infrared FLIR gun that has apparently been around since the 70's), and I had to look up Michael Crichton, the writer.
But that's where things went wrong. I got lost in a wiki-hole on the Gell-Mann Effect, and discovered that Michale Crichton was a climate denier, heavy in the aughts, when Big Fossil was funding a global misinformation campaign. Problem is, he's a trained medical scientist. Not a climate scientist or even an environmental scientist. But the entry that brought me here is literally a famous quote of his, Michael Crichton, about how experts fail to maintain a critical stance when reading mainstream media about topics they are not experts in.
Completely unrelated image credit: AI Art - Four Polished Females Wearing Glittering Bronze Holographic Bodysuits on a Mansion Lawn - 2023
No comments:
Post a Comment