This one goes beyond just climate.
It would seem that this would be more of a problem with the ‘soft’ sciences - psychology, etc., where research often depends on more subjective measurements such as whether someone feels better. But even when hard numbers are involved, the misapplication of statistics and biased interpretation can significantly shift things. Below are a series of links both explaining the larger picture and providing examples in medicine, clinical research, economics, sports and hydrology.
What is Medicine’s 5 Sigma?
The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.
40% of Economics Experiments Fail Replication
The Irreproducibility Crisis of Modern Science
How Shoddy Statistics Found a Home in Sports Research
Hydrology and Water Resources
Our findings of low reproducibility of research published in six hydrology and water resources journals in 2017 mirrors low rates of reproducibility previously reported in psychology (100 experiments) Assessing data availability and research reproducibility in hydrology and water resources, computer systems research (613 articles), and articles published in Science (204 articles).
NOTE: I originally linked to a couple of articles by John Ioaniddes. I have removed those links. His research might be correct, but given his recent mystifying reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic I now consider him to be unreliable in most things scientific/medical.