I agree with your criticism. I want to add one more: GDP is a measure of activity. Measuring lights on satellite images is a state. So somehow this study is cor

I agree with your criticism. I want to add one more: GDP is a measure of activity. Measuring lights on satellite images is a state. So somehow this study is correlating stock (# of lights) to a flow (economic activity). Seems like a pretty basic comparison error. There have to be a gazillion other caveats - something stinks about this study. This content sings to many of their readers who cant moss an opportunity to tell others that china’s books are cooked.