Another Garbage Piece of Climate Research Bites the Dust

By December 6, 2025Commentary2 min read

The “prestigious” journal Nature has had to retract a study claiming that global warming was going to cause immense global economic damage.  The study was widely relied on to justify truly stupid energy policies.  I have said before that so-called climate scientists have zero ethics and will lie about anything in pursuit of their supposedly world-saving goal to stop the use of fossil fuels.  They are funded by and benefit rich donors who also just happen to invest in truly environmentally damaging solar, wind and other renewable energy sources.  No one should trust any climate research that doesn’t come from outside the mainstream hysterics.  The retraction is noted here.  (Nature Retraction)

The Wall Street Journal explains the issues here.  Sounds like outright fraud, in which the Nature reviewers and editors must have been complicit.  How could this level of error been missed if not intentionally.  I suspect it was published out of desperation, as the public is sick of the climate hysteria and the real economic damage it has caused.  Electricity prices have skyrocketed, affecting the price of everything else.  In some countries, Germany being the most notable example, the energy policies resulting from climate hysteria have destroyed the economy.  Fortunately our current US administration recognizes this garbage for what it is and is dedicated to cheaper energy.  (WSJ Article)

Kevin Roche

Author Kevin Roche

The Healthy Skeptic is a website about the health care system, and is written by Kevin Roche, who has many years of experience working in the health industry through Roche Consulting, LLC. Mr. Roche is available to assist health care companies through consulting arrangements and may be reached at khroche@healthy-skeptic.com.

More posts by Kevin Roche

Join the discussion 2 Comments

  • broonoff says:

    Not only there were data discrepancies, but the original paper had serious problems with its methodology. The funny thing, that it was pointed out by their own colleague at PIK.

    “”Schötz told Retraction Watch the issues he raised “were not resolved by the authors’ correction.” He said the revised data account for some correlation between areas close together but “still ignores many strong correlations” between areas with similar data that might be farther apart.
    The correlations the authors missed were “not due to physical distance but due to the regions being part of the same economic zone in some sense,” Schötz said.””
    https://retractionwatch.com/2025/12/03/authors-retract-nature-paper-projecting-high-costs-of-climate-change/

Leave a comment