Sir Realist writes: A recent Slashdot scoop pointed us at a scientific study that claimed that 42% of global sea-level rises could be due to groundwater use. It was a good story. But as is often the way with science, there are folks who interpret the data differently. Scott Johnson at ars technica has a good writeup which includes two recent studies that came to remarkably different conclusions from mostly the same data, and an explanation of the assumptions the authors were making that led to those differences. Essentially, there is some reason to think that the groundwater estimates used in the first study were too high, but thats still under debate, so its worth reading the whole argument. Scientific review in action!