You continue to have difficulty getting your head around the scientific process. Virtually ALL scientists have published incorrect interpretations of data or done flawed studies. Science moves forward through a logical review process and repetition to attempt to falsify earlier experiments and theories in an effort to build a more accurate theory. Doesn't mean the earlier scientists were stupid or sloppy, it just means they did not get the story completely right. Very few theories/models/predictions turn out exactly as the original scientist thinks they will. Sometimes data is reinterpreted using new and better models or theories to come up with significantly different interpretations. That doesn't mean that at any given time the current research or theory is more likely to be wrong than an earlier theory. New theories usually explain experimental data better.
Hanging on to this example of a falsified 1970's cooling theory as a reason to reject all the massive subsequent work in the climate field (that is contrary to your favored politically driven conclusion), is the antithesis of rational scientific review. You are beating a dead horse. Move on or just admit you read science through a very biased set of lenses.