From: Richard Black
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 7:01 AM
To: Anthony Watts
Subject: RE: Your article on rice yields
Dear Anthony,
Thanks for your email. You are correct – I am mistaken – a correction will be made to the news story shortly.
Best regards,
Richard Black
…my letter follows
From: Anthony Watts
Sent: 11 August 2010 00:51
To: Richard Black; Richard Black-Internet
Subject: Your article on rice yields
Importance: High
Dear Mr. Black,
I’m writing as a courtesy to advise you that I believe your article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10918591
Which says “Yields have fallen by 10-20% over the last 25 years in some locations.”
…is in error.
The actual press release says ”Rising temperatures during the past 25 years have already cut the yield growth rate by 10-20 percent in several locations.”
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-08/uoc–htt080610.php
It is not the gross yield that has supposedly fallen, but the rate of increase in the yield.
Further, I have a graph from the International Rice Research Institute which supports this and demonstrates that gross rice yields are still increasing in Asia:
http://beta.irri.org/test/j15/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=393&Itemid=100104
I think it’s just a simple interpretive error on how you read the press release, but it does have large consequences for how the story is interpreted by readers. Here in Northern California, one of the largest rice growing areas of the world, a call to our local Rice Association confirmed this. A correction might be in order.
Thank you for your consideration.
Best Regards,
Anthony Watts
=============================================
See these related WUWT stories:
Rice yields, CO2 and temperature – you write the article
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well stroked. In my neck of the woods, the local paper is quick to correct an error in identifying a dog at a dog show. Requests for correction of more substantive errors usually are met with, “We stand by our original story.”
Will the correction get the same level of publicity as the original mis-quote?
In between slurps of tea, is it really temperature increases that have actually caused the “rate of growth” to slow over the last 25 years? Or is there some other potential cause as yet undiscovered or ignored even? It seems to me unlikely that plants that require warmth & water & CO2 to grow would reduce output with a modest increase in temperature, & a modest increse inb CO2 with it.
Looks like the picture is phony as well and is photoshopped…. its the perfect match for the story.
Richard Black deserves high praise for including the words, “I am mistaken.” His response would have read just fine without that. It reflects true professionalism and sturdy self-esteem. I am impressed.
Well done!
Second slurp & thoughts. Perhaps the particular varieties of rice are reaching there ability to naturally increase rate of growth? Perhaps new high-yielding varieties with stronger growth characteristics are needed?
Anthony, I am impressed – as always – with your courteous approach. I am also encouraged by the journalist’s willingness to print a correction. As always, however, the impact and the damage are done by the original article. Corrections and retractions are generally crafted to appear insignificant, and well nigh impossible to find.
wow!
Hello page 76!
Seems the correction is done. There is a world of difference between falling yields and slowing growth rates of yields. Sheesh
Fair play to him. If you read these comments Mr Black, as a licence fee payer, may i ask you to do some checking on the press releases before you post them on the bbc website?
Don’t know if this has been amended yet – but if it has the title and first line is STILL misleading.
Title – “Rice yields ‘to fall’ under global warming”
First line – “Global warming is set to cut rice yields in Asia, research suggests.”
???
Now THIS is responsible science at its best. Courteous, to the point, and FACTUAL. Bravo Anthony.
What a civil exchange. Well done, Anthony.
How about that. Courteous and professional.
It will be interesting to see how his tone changes after he realized who his correspondent is. Obviously, he doesn’t yet realize that Anthony Watts is one of the world’s most notorious oil- and coal-funded climate change deniers.
Very well done!
But, fortunate for the AGW crowd, this story, and all the others, are to be seen on the front pages of MSM on almost a daily basis in Norway.
They are really busy nowadays! Looks like panic to me.
On the other hand; Maybe it hurts their case more than advance it?
Wow, Richard Black’s response is a model for how people should deal with errors of fact. A certain group of climate scientists should take note.
Amazing to see the MSM admit an error. Way to stay classy and indicate it’s a “simple interpretive error” instead of the more likely “spun to generate maximum impact”.
-Scott
Very impressive!
When may we expect the Beeb to renounce their membership in the Most Holy Church of Mann-made Global Warming and cease their advocacy of this non-scientific farce? I’ll wager a pint of Sierra Nevada Autumn Brown Ale that someone at the Beeb may connect the dots regarding the difference between the output of models and field observations by 2050.
I wrote Mr Black an e-mail and then tried to send it. And lo and behold, a question about what my e-mail server is called – POP 3? SMTP? No idea. Is this some trick to avoid comments from the public?
I’m glad your’e on them like a hawk, Anthony! I once had to correct them and I provided sources when they claimed 2003 was “likely to be the hottest year on record” and that it was extra unusual because unlike 1998, the previous hottest year on record, there was no El Niño in 2003 to raise temperatures.
I had to tell them that, in fact, there had been a moderate El Niño during the fall, winter, and spring of 2002/03 and that unlike 1998, no La Niña formed in the autumn like in 1998 which drastically cooled global temperatures by year’s end.
In the end, 2003 wasn’t the warmest thanks to a last minute cool off… but as has been the case nearly every year in the past 10 years… they simply find a time when it may appear temps will be a new record, whether that be January-October or January-November and then they just release all the press releases and yell very loudly… and then when the last 1 or 2 months are factored in, the year ends up being 3rd or 5th or whatever and a quiet press release is issued sometime in January.
Well-done
Just checked the BBC site, at 15h30 GMT, 12th August. As yet, no correction.
A correction will eventually appear, but it will be very well hidden. Hardly anyone will be disabused of the idea “warming = starvation in Asia.”
I’m in Manila at the moment. The Philippines has large stores of rice, going bad. The country now intends to buy more rice (which will go into store) so the people do not go hungry.
Makes you weep, when you see how malnourished are some of the children. Don’t hold your breath for a report from the BBC on this.