cc: plemke , ewwo , "r.r.dickson" , "Simon.J.Brown" , mccave , haugan , studhope , "B.Turrell" , rwood , "cvy.NERC.NERC" , "nrc.NERC.NERC" , "nth.NERC.NERC" , "ppn.NERC.NERC" , "j.m.slingo" , "p.j.valdes" , Lowe J , C Gommenginger , "Jochem.Marotzke.SOC.NERC" , Jochem Marotzke , Meric Srokosz , Peter Challenor , "a.j.watson" , "k.briffa" , "m.hulme" , lkeigwin date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:34:20 -0000 from: Lowe J subject: RE: Rapid draft Science and Implementation Plans to: 'Philip Newton' , "simon.tett" Dear All I have been away in Sweden for time, and have come back to an avalanche of emails on the RCC Science and Implementation plans. I am a bit non-plussed by the degree of apparent misunderstanding between us, and I think it won't be resolved very much by adding to the paper mountain. I suggest we try to identify the key issues in the correspondence and broker some frank talking at the meeting on 18 December. Like Philip, and several others, I actually like the Science Plan as it is written, IF it means what I think it means. For me the key issues that I seek clarification on (at the meeting) are: 1) What is meant by focussing the programme on the THC ? Like several others on the committee, I had taken that to mean that we include assessment of the impacts of THC variations on climate. I actually support the idea that the programme should be focused on the THC, but we must allow some assessment of what makes the THC tick, and what impacts changes in THC strength have on regional climate. I don't see how we can satisfy these elements by earmarking the bulk of the finance to a short-term measurement programme only. That aspect is important indeed - but it should not be done in isolation from other very important scientific work. 2) The make-up of the Steering Committee presumably reflects the mix of science communities that are deemed important to the success of the programme. If the programme is not to embrace studies of terrestrial palaeo-records and the various types of studies mentioned in despatches from Keith, Paul, Sandy etc., then some of us on the committee may feel redundant. I think we might need some clarification of the mix of importance attached to the different elements of the programme (measurement, modelling, ocean palaeo-records, terrestrial palaeo-records, climate changes over different timescales, etc.). Hopefully this will be ironed out on 18 Dec. 3) We should not lose sight of the fact that other factors may have played an important role in driving climate changes in the North Atlantic region in recent times (Holocene, for example). Bjorck et al. have a paper coming out in next issue of Geology which argues (on very strong grounds) that the early Preboreal cold oscillation that affected the whole of the northern hemisphere was not initiated by ocean changes at all, but by variations in solar activity. Bond et al. also have a paper coming out in next issue of Science (out on Science Express just now) which also argues that the 1500-year cycles that appear in Holocene palaeo-records are also a response to solar forcing, and not to ocean changes. Now, I am not suggesting at all that this diminishes the importance of THC - but we have to be able to establish the importance of the role of THC variations against other things. I don't see how that can be done without making very precise comparisons between oceanic, terrestrial and (perhaps) ice-core records. The papers by Bjorck et al and Bond et al are examples of the multi-disciplinary studies now required to attain the wider perspective. So I am arguing for placing the RCC within a wider context, although the crux of the programme should be the mode of operation of the THC. Meric: I will try to get the details of the publications mentioned above to you on Monday - if you want them. I am running out of time just now - having just got back to the department, I am trying to catch up with a lot of things. I hope we can resolve the various issues and viewpoints expressed in the email correspondence. In the end we have to present a programme that knits together the various communities represented by SC members, around the common theme - otherwise I do not see the point of the programme any more. The excitement lies in that objective, as much as in understanding better what is essentially one element of a complex global climate system, important though that element might be. John Lowe