Given the paper already appears to have a correction for something minor, one more would seem appropriate, yes - it’s a pretty jarring error. But it’s just dis

Given the paper already appears to have a correction for something minor, one more would seem appropriate, yes - it’s a pretty jarring error. But it’s just disingenuous to say it affects (let alone “invalidates”) the actual study. And shouldn’t a proper pedant spot that the top pin isn’t even where Lübeck is - that’s Rostock.