Source: Paper That Blames The Sun For Climate Change Was Just Retracted From Major Journal A paper published last year that claimed global warming was all to do with the Sun has been retracted. Nature Publishing Group-owned Scientific Reports has found that the paper's conclusion was based on a flawed assumption. The decision comes after sharp criticism from the scientific community prompted the journal's editors to undertake a further review of the study. . . . It claimed that human activity was not to blame for the roughly one degree rise in global temperatures since the Industrial Revolution, and therefore we can avoid culpability for the shockingly fast upward trend of global temperatures having devastating effects on communities and ecosystems around the world. Empiricism wins again. Bob Wilson
The magnitude of the warming effect was challenged, but the effect remains. I suggest that we need to understand how important this effect is, and include it in calculations about what is going on. Bath and bath water?
"Why Most Published Research Findings Are False" https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?type=printable&id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 Short answer: Stick to systematic reviews/meta analysis/consensus conclusions backed by multiple studies and researchers (like the IPCC reports). Single studies that appear to go against the prevailing wisdom are much more likely to be false, than to be prophetic.
Article mentioned @5 was published in 2005 and has generated a lot of (scholarly ) discussion since. It is clear from the article that medical research findings were examined, it was published in a medical journal, but possibly some more distant from the matter read that title as saying more than it is meant to. But if this is something you find important, there is no substitute for doing your own shovel work. Start with https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040168 Link @5 did not function for me.
