Locator: 49600STATISTICS.
Amazing that Nature accept this study in the first place.
Fudged data!
This study was reported / retracted by perhaps the most respected science outlet:
A widely cited study on economic damage from climate change was retracted Wednesday following criticism from peers.
The research, published last year in the prestigious journal Nature, projected that the world’s economic output would decline 62% by 2100 under a high-carbon emissions scenario. The estimate was much more severe than other forecasts, prompting scrutiny of the underlying data.
“We broadly agree with the issues raised, and have made corrections to the underlying economic data and to our methodology to address them,” said study author Leonie Wenz, from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. “These changes are too substantial for a correction of the original article in Nature.”
The study examined historical data from some 1,600 regions worldwide over the past four decades to project how changes in temperature and precipitation would affect economic growth, including factors like agricultural yields, labor productivity and infrastructure.
However, after the study was published, other researchers found that economic data from one country—Uzbekistan—during a short time from 1995 to 1999 had skewed the results. Without Uzbekistan, the 2100 damage forecast fell to 23%, not 62%. The researchers published their critique in Nature in August.
Another researcher who wasn’t involved in the original work, Christof Schötz, said the results were more uncertain than the study suggested and published a separate critique in Nature in August.
The study had been cited by the U.S. Congressional Budget Office, the World Bank and the Network for Greening the Financial System, or NGFS, a coalition of central banks from which the Federal Reserve withdrew this year.
The coalition, which has members in about 90 countries, incorporated the damage forecast in risk tools that banks can use, for instance, to stress-test portfolios to meet European regulations. The NGFS damage estimate still incorporates the study—with a disclaimer flagging the retraction—pending its next update.
Central bank models of the economic impacts of climate change could have far-reaching implications. If these models show impacts are going to be much worse than previously thought, regulators could make banks set aside more capital to buffer against potential losses associated with assets exposed to climate change, according to Ely Sandler, a researcher at the Harvard Kennedy School.
US GDP: $30 trillion.
Uzbekistan: $140 billion.
UZ GDP / US GDP = 140 9 zeroes / 30 12 zeroes = 140 / 30000 = 0.5%.
Oh, give me a break. I've seen better data presented by junior high students at science fairs.
Memo to self: cancel subscription to Nature.
This reminds me of the vaccine article that was retracted by Lancet years ago -- the most respected medical journal in the world found to have published corrupt data: had to do with MMR vaccine and autism. My hunch: RFK, Jr., will resurrect that study, if he hasn't already.
