date: Thu Jul 8 16:10:37 2004 from: Phil Jones subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL Fwd: Re: edits to page 3-23 NRC Report (fwd) to: "Michael E. Mann" Mike, For your interest, there is an ECMWF ERA-40 Report coming out soon, which shows that Kalnay and Cai are wrong. It isn't that strongly worded as the first author is a personal friend of Eugenia. The result is rather hidden in the middle of the report. It isn't peer review, but a slimmed down version will go to a journal. KC are wrong because the difference between NCEP and real surface temps (CRU) over eastern N. America doesn't happen with ERA-40. ERA-40 assimilates surface temps (which NCEP didn't) and doing this makes the agreement with CRU better. Also ERA-40's trends in the lower atmosphere are all physically consistent where NCEP's are not - over eastern US. I can send if you want, but it won't be out as a report for a couple of months. Cheers Phil At 10:52 08/07/2004 -0400, you wrote: Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 18:26:43 -0400 To: Roger Pielke From: "Michael E. Mann" Subject: Re: edits to page 3-23 NRC Report (fwd) Cc: Amanda Staudt , radforce@nas.edu Roger, The point isn't who drafted the original text. Rather, my point is that it is not acceptable for you to simply edit our text wherever you see fit, which is what you seem to be doing throughout the process. As I stated before, I find your changes here unacceptable. Our chair can clarify the guidelines for what is proper procedure here, but I find it unacceptable for you to be making unilateral changes to our text at this point. That is not appropriate procedure based on my understanding. With regard to your argument, I would think it obvious that peer-review alone is *not* a sufficient to establish what is "good science". That is why we do *assessment*, i.e., use our own expert judgement to assess what is and is not appropriate or relevant for our report within the peer-reviewed literature. I think this is obvious. As I stated before, I do not find your changes acceptable and I personally reject them. We must rely therefore on further comments from our chair and co-authors to arbitrate this disagreement. This is the last of my comments on the matter up until that point. best regards, Mike At 06:15 PM 7/6/2004, Roger Pielke wrote: Mike- There is no reason to exclude peer-reviewed papers that are relevant to a topic in our report. For example, I have no problem citing the Trenberth comment even though I disagree with it. Kalnay and Cai effectively responded to his comments, but both should be included. Moreover, my change with respect to "controversial" was sent earlier but it was not included. In any case, I cannot imagine that the issue of an effect on temperature by changing the Bowen ratio due to land use change is controversial. The fact that you drafted this section does not preclude edits. The report should be inclusive and represent diverse views on a subject. I have accepted text that you wrote that I have disagreement with, in order to present a broad view in the report. I expect the same courtesy in return. Disagreements on peer reviewed publications should be aired in subsequent peer reviewed papers, not by arbitrarily excluding them from our report. Roger -- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Roger A. Pielke, Sr., Professor and State Climatologist 1371 Campus Delivery, Department Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1371, Phone: 970-491-8293/Fax: 970-491-3314, Email: pielke@atmos.colostate.edu VISIT OUR WEBSITES AT: [1]http://blue.atmos.colostate.edu/ and [2]http://climate.atmos.colostate.edu On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, Michael E. Mann wrote: > Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 17:36:26 -0400 > From: Michael E. Mann > To: Roger Pielke > Cc: Amanda Staudt , radforce@nas.edu > Subject: Re: edits to page 3-23 NRC Report (fwd) > > Dear Roger et al, > > I drafted this section. > > Given that leading researchers (e.g. Trenberth et al) have detailed some > major problems w/ the arguments put forward by Kalnay et al as cited, the > current wording (use of the term "controversial") is appropriate as it > stands, and I consider the suggested change unacceptable. The added > references are of questionable relevance, and one of the cited papers > (McKitrick and Michaels) is, in my opion, of dubious scientific merit. I > don't believe that these latest changes would stand up to the independent > review process that our report will go through, in any case. > > At this late stage, I believe we must keep the draft as it is, unless the > chair and a plurality of the co-authors support your suggested change. > > Mike > > At 05:18 PM 7/6/2004, Roger Pielke wrote: > > > -- > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Roger A. Pielke, Sr., Professor and State Climatologist > 1371 Campus Delivery, Department Atmospheric Science, > Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1371, > Phone: 970-491-8293/Fax: 970-491-3314, Email: > pielke@atmos.colostate.edu > VISIT OUR WEBSITES AT: [3]http://blue.atmos.colostate.edu/ > and [4]http://climate.atmos.colostate.edu > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 14:52:12 -0600 > From: Roger Pielke > To: Amanda Staudt , radforce@nas.edu > Subject: edits to page 3-23 NRC Report > > Hi Amanda- > > I have made edits to the paragraph on page 3-23 lines > 10-20, including the addition of two recent papers. Please > let me know if these procedure of just copying the section > with the change and using Word Tracking is easier for the > edits that resending the entire chapter. > > Roger > > R.A.Pielke, Sr. Professor > Work Phone:970-491-8293 > Web Access: > [5]http://blue.atmos.colostate.edu<[6]http://blue.atmos.colostate.edu/> > [7]http://climate.atmos.colostate.edu<[8]http://climate.atmos.colostate.edu/> > > ______________________________________________________________ > Professor Michael E. Mann > Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall > University of Virginia > Charlottesville, VA 22903 > _______________________________________________________________________ > e-mail: mann@virginia.edu Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137 > [9]http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml > ______________________________________________________________ Professor Michael E. Mann Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22903 _______________________________________________________________________ e-mail: mann@virginia.edu Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137 [10]http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml ______________________________________________________________ Professor Michael E. Mann Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22903 _______________________________________________________________________ e-mail: mann@virginia.edu Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137 [11]http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 University of East Anglia Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk NR4 7TJ UK ----------------------------------------------------------------------------