cc: Keith Briffa date: Wed May 24 16:51:51 2006 from: Tim Osborn subject: Re: BP briefing to: peter.stott@metoffice.gov.uk Peter - I've discussed with Keith and attach a few PPT slides. Hopefully they are of some use. They are: (1) A composite of various NH temperature reconstructions done by us pre-Moberg, but then Science added the Moberg series and published it again (without telling us or acknowledging us would you believe!). (2) A composite of various simulated NH temperature time series published recently by us (a month or so ago in Clim. Dyn.). (3-4) These show the envelope of reconstructions in grey, then overlaid in red by the envelope of model simulations. Useful showing model consistency with the real world. Not yet published. Please don't give to anyone else, but feel free to use it for your presentation if you want. (5-11) Set of slides from our recent Science paper, hopefully self explanatory. Feel free to use or not use any of this material as you see fit. It would be nice to know, however, if you do use any of it. Cheers Tim At 14:05 24/05/2006, you wrote: Dear Tim and Keith I have to give a presentation to senior BP Executives next Wednesday (list is Steven E. Koonin Chief Scientist Joseph P. Merlini, Director Strategic Cooperation Chris J. Mottershead, Distinguished Advisor, Energy & the Environment John K. Wells, Vice President Environment Duncan G.M. Eggar, Senior Business Advisor & Team Leader -Sustainable Mobility) answering amongst other questions the following question "Many papers published in the past few years show that the MBH record very likely under-estimates temperature variability over the past 1500 years. Presumably the GCMs were able to reproduce (or were tuned to) the low MBH variability. How do they have to be modified to reproduce the greater variability? What implications does that have for attribution and predictions going forward?" Figures 6.10 and Fig 6.13 of the IPCC AR4 would be useful but of course they are still under wraps. Alternatively the latest equivalent I have is from Mann et al, EOS, 84, 256-258, 2003 but this does not include series like Moberg 2005. Do you know whether there is a more recent equivalent published like Fig 6.10 and 6.13 ? Many thanks for any help or pointers, Peter -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dr. Peter Stott Climate Scientist Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research (Reading Unit) Meteorology Building, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6BB Tel: +44 (0)118 378 5613 Fax: +44 (0)118 378 5615 Mobile: 07753880683 E-mail:peter.stott@metoffice.gov.uk [1]http://www.metoffice.gov.uk NOTE WILL ALSO BE AT EXETER PART OF EACH WEEK ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~