cc: joos , Ricardo Villalba , Eystein Jansen , cddhr@giss.nasa.gov, Keith Briffa , t.osborn@uea.ac.uk date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 09:06:29 -0600 from: Jonathan Overpeck subject: Fwd: Re: Gavin Smchmidt'comment to: cddhr@giss.nasa.gov David - can you comment, help? thx, Peck >X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 >X-Virus-checked: by University of Berne >Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:51:05 +0200 >From: Fortunat Joos >Organization: University of Bern >X-Accept-Language: en-us, en >To: Jonathan Overpeck >Cc: Ricardo Villalba , > Eystein Jansen , cddhr@giss.nasa.gov, > Keith Briffa , t.osborn@uea.ac.uk >Subject: Re: Gavin Smchmidt'comment > > > >Jonathan Overpeck wrote: >>Hi Fortunat - Glad you're on this, and thanks for helping us get it >>right. I agree we need assurance from Chap 2 (David, can you make >>sure we've got it) that the deleted issues are, indeed, covered in >>Chap 2. > >In particular, I am not sure that chap 2 covers the Solanki et al. issue > >> >>thanks again, Peck >> >>>Hi, >>> >>>What we agreed was actually to keep line 25 to line 34 on p 6-35 >>>and not just until line 30. (As well line 50, p-36 line 2-7). >>> >>>The sentence on line 32/33 that there is general agreement in the >>>evolution of the different proxies is important as there is in >>>general much confusion about this and this is a chapter 6 >>>statement covering the whole millennium. The sentence also links >>>nicely to the next sentence on line 50. Yes, as agreed in Bergen >>>delete the other parts if chapter 2 indeed is going to cover it. I >>>have not done so in my revision as I wanted to hear what chap 2 is >>>doing before deleting. >>> >>>Peck, in total we will delete 22 line. Note that I have also >>>squezzed out a few line in the sulfur section. Making progress! >>> >>>Regards, Fortunat >>> >>>David Rind wrote: >>> >>>>Jonathan, >>>> >>>> >>>>Keith and I discussed this at the meeting; basically what we need >>>>to keep is: >>>> >>>>P. 6-25, lines 25-30, first sentence on line 50, and P. 6-26 the >>>>first paragraph (lines 2-7). >>>> >>>> >>>>All the rest is discussed in one form or another in Chapter 2, pp. 55-56. >>>> >>>>Concerning the volcanic forcing, there isn't nearly as much >>>>overlap, and Chapter 6 did not have very much anyway - I think it >>>>would be useful to keep what's there, adding just a reference to >>>>Chapter 2 (add: "see also Chapter 2", at the end of line 26). >>>>(I'm assuming that Fig. 6-13a still includes the solar and >>>>volcanic forcing). >>>> >>>>David >>>> >>>> >>>>At 11:40 AM -0600 7/18/06, Jonathan Overpeck wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hi David - it's good to know you can get to work before someone, >>>>>even if they live in Europe. >>>>> >>>>>Your plan sounds good, and is it safe to assume that you will be >>>>>making sure Chap 2 gets the right material from chap 6, and that >>>>>we can thus pare our discussion of past solar and volcanic >>>>>forcing down to a minimum? Can you give us an update of what >>>>>they will not cover that we should (i.e., looking at section >>>>>6.6)? >>>>> >>>>>Many thanks, Peck >>>>> >>>>>>Hi All, >>>>>> >>>>>>[It's a sad state of affairs if I'm the one who gets to work >>>>>>sooner! (regardless of the time difference).] >>>>>> >>>>>>What is discussed below is basically what we thought in >>>>>>response to Gavin's comment - that we would basically >>>>>>cross-reference chap 2, where the primary discussion would >>>>>>occur. It's consistent with chapter 2's general discussion of >>>>>>how forcings have changed over time, and would seem odd if >>>>>>chapter 2 left out past solar and volcanic forcing. Chapter 2 >>>>>>should feel free to utilize anything that existed in Chapter 6 >>>>>>on these issues to complement their discussion, if the need >>>>>>arises. Once that is finalized, Chapter 6 can then make the >>>>>>proper cross-references. >>>>>> >>>>>>David >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>At 10:26 AM -0600 7/18/06, Jonathan Overpeck wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Hi Ricardo - good points. We did discuss this in Bergen, and >>>>>>>David Rind (as a Chap 2 CA) was going to help make sure we >>>>>>>kept things covered in chap 2, while cutting our solar and >>>>>>>volcanic discussions in chap 6. The key will be >>>>>>>cross-referencing chap 2 carefully. So, Keith, Ricardo and >>>>>>>David - please interact to figure out how to work this >>>>>>>efficiently. Perhaps David could comment first since he's at >>>>>>>work sooner. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Thanks... Best, Peck >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Hi all! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In comment 6-811, Gavin Schmidt points out that our sections >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>6.6.3.1 Solar forcing >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>6.6.3.2 Volcanic forcing >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>largely replicate the discussion in Chap. 2 on the same >>>>>>>>topics. I checked >>>>>>>>Chap. 2, and they provide a large (almost 8 pages in the SOD) >>>>>>>>discussion >>>>>>>>mainly on solar and but also on volcanic forcings. Gavin >>>>>>>>suggests that only >>>>>>>>the implementation issues should be discussed in our chapter >>>>>>>>and leave the >>>>>>>>most general information in Chapter 2. We can substantially short our >>>>>>>>section following his advice. Please, find below the outline of the >>>>>>>>sections in Chap. 2 dealing with solar and volcanic forcings. Cheers, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Ricardo >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7 Natural Forcings >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.1 Solar Variability >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.1.1 Direct observations of solar irradiance >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.1.1.1 Satellite measurements of total solar irradiance >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.1.1.2 Observed decadal trends and variability >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.1.1.3 Measurements of solar spectral irradiance >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.1.2 Estimating past solar radiative forcing >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.1.2.1 Reconstructions of past variations in solar irradiance >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.1.2.2 Implications for solar radiative forcing >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.1.3 Indirect effects of solar variability >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.2 Explosive Volcanic Activity >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.2.1 Radiative effects of volcanic aerosols >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>2.7.2.2 Thermal, dynamic and chemistry perturbations forced by volcanic >>>>>>>>aerosols >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>----- Original Message ----- >>>>>>>>From: "Tim Osborn" >>>>>>>>To: "Jonathan Overpeck" ; "Keith Briffa" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Cc: "Eystein Jansen" ; "Ricardo Villalba" >>>>>>>>; "joos" >>>>>>>>Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 12:25 PM >>>>>>>>Subject: Re: Special instructions/timing adjustment >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm halfway through these changes and will get the revised figures >>>>>>>>> out to you probably tomorrow, except maybe the SH one, because: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm not sure if the van Ommen (pers. comm.) data shown by Jones & >>>>>>>>> Mann and suggested by Riccardo are the data to use or not. Is it >>>>>>>>> published properly? I've seen the last 700 years of the Law Dome 18O >>>>>>>>> record published, so perhaps we should show just the period since >>>>>>>>> 1300 AD? That period appears in: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mayewski PA, Maasch KA, White JWC, et al. >>>>>>>>> A 700 year record of Southern Hemisphere extratropical >>>>>>>>>climate variability >>>>>>>>> ANNALS OF GLACIOLOGY 39: 127-132 2004 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Goodwin ID, van Ommen TD, Curran MAJ, et al. >>>>>>>>> Mid latitude winter climate variability in the South Indian and >>>>>>>>> southwest Pacific regions since 1300 AD >>>>>>>>> CLIMATE DYNAMICS 22 (8): 783-794 JUL 2004 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> See below for some more comments in respect to individual figures. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> At 21:36 30/06/2006, Jonathan Overpeck wrote: >>>>>>>>> >Figure 6.10. >>>>>>>>> >1. shade the connection between the top and middle panels >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> yes >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >2. remove the dotted (long instrumental) curve from the middle panel >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> yes >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >3. replace the red shaded region in the bottom panel with the >>>>>>>>> >grey-scale one used in Fig 6.13 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> yes >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >4. label only every increment of 10 in the grey-scale bar (formally >>>>>>>>> >color) in the bottom panel >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> yes >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >5. Increase font sizes for axis numbering and axis labeling - all >>>>>>>>> >are too small. You can figure out the best size by reducing figs to >>>>>>>>> >likely page size minus margins. We guess the captions need to be >>>>>>>>> >bigger by a couple increments at least. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> yes >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >Figure 6.11. >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> >1. This one is in pretty good shape except that Ricardo has to >>>>>>>>> >determine if S. African boreholes need to be removed. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think Henry said they were published and could stay >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >Figure 6.12 >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> >1. again, please delete S. African borehole if Ricardo indicates >>>>>>>>> >it's still not published. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think Henry said they could stay. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >2. consider adding Law Dome temperature record - Ricardo is >>>>>>>>> >investigating, but perhaps Keith/Tim can help figure out if it's >>>>>>>>> >valid to include. Feel free to check with Valerie on this too, as >>>>>>>>> >she seems to know these data at least a little >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Already discussed above. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >3. also, please increase font sizes and make sure they match 6.10 - >>>>>>>>> >probably better to use bold fonts >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You are right that I've mixed bold and non-bold. When reduced to >>>>>>>>> small size, the non-bold actually read more clearly than the bold, I >>>>>>>>> think, so I'll standardise on non-bold. It's not possible to >>>>>>>>> completely standardise on the size, because each figure I provide >>>>>>>>> might be scaled by different amounts. I don't know final figure >>>>>>>>> size, so will make a good guess. Should be ok. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >Figure 6.13 >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> >1. we are going to split the existing 6.13 into two figure. The >>>>>>>>> >first is 100% Tim's fig., and is just an upgrade of the existing >>>>>>>>> >6.13 a-d, with the only changes being: >>>>>>>>> >1a. delete the old ECHO-G red dashed line curve in panel d, and >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Keith says this was discussed and rejected, so I should >>>>>>>>>keep old ECHO-G >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>in? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >1b. please also increase font sizes and make sure they match 6.10 >>>>>>>>> >and 12 - please use bold fonts. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ok, as discussed above. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >2. The existing 6.13e is going to become a new 6.14, with the >>>>>>>>> >addition of a new forcings panel "a" on top of the existing panel e >>>>>>>>> >(which becomes 6.14b). To make this happen, Tim and Fortunat have to >>>>>>>>> >coordinate, as Tim has the forcing data (and knows what we what) and >>>>>>>>> >Tim has the existing figure. We suspect it will be easier for >>>>>>>>> >Fortunat to give Tim data and layout advice, and for Tim to make a >>>>>>>>> >figure that matches the other figs he's doing. PLEASE NOTE that this >>>>>>>>> >fig can't be as large as the existing 6.13a-d, but needs to be more >>>>>>>>> >compact to permit its inclusion. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> done. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Tim >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dr Timothy J Osborn, Academic Fellow >>>>>>>>> Climatic Research Unit >>>>>>>>> School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia >>>>>>>>> Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> e-mail: t.osborn@uea.ac.uk >>>>>>>>> phone: +44 1603 592089 >>>>>>>>> fax: +44 1603 507784 >>>>>>>>> web: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/ >>>>>>>>> sunclock: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/sunclock.htm >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> **Norwich -- City for Science: >>>>>>>>> **Hosting the BA Festival 2-9 September 2006 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>-- >>>>>>>Jonathan T. Overpeck >>>>>>>Director, Institute for the Study of Planet Earth >>>>>>>Professor, Department of Geosciences >>>>>>>Professor, Department of Atmospheric Sciences >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Mail and Fedex Address: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Institute for the Study of Planet Earth >>>>>>>715 N. Park Ave. 2nd Floor >>>>>>>University of Arizona >>>>>>>Tucson, AZ 85721 >>>>>>>direct tel: +1 520 622-9065 >>>>>>>fax: +1 520 792-8795 >>>>>>>http://www.geo.arizona.edu/ >>>>>>>http://www.ispe.arizona.edu/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>-- >>>>>>/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >>>>>> >>>>>>/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>Jonathan T. Overpeck >>>>>Director, Institute for the Study of Planet Earth >>>>>Professor, Department of Geosciences >>>>>Professor, Department of Atmospheric Sciences >>>>> >>>>>Mail and Fedex Address: >>>>> >>>>>Institute for the Study of Planet Earth >>>>>715 N. Park Ave. 2nd Floor >>>>>University of Arizona >>>>>Tucson, AZ 85721 >>>>>direct tel: +1 520 622-9065 >>>>>fax: +1 520 792-8795 >>>>>http://www.geo.arizona.edu/ >>>>>http://www.ispe.arizona.edu/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>>-- >>> >>> Climate and Environmental Physics, >>> Physics Institute, University of Bern >>> Sidlerstr. 5, CH-3012 Bern >>> Phone: ++41(0)31 631 44 61 Fax: ++41(0)31 631 87 42 >>> Internet: http://www.climate.unibe.ch/~joos/ >> >> >> > >-- > > Climate and Environmental Physics, > Physics Institute, University of Bern > Sidlerstr. 5, CH-3012 Bern > Phone: ++41(0)31 631 44 61 Fax: ++41(0)31 631 87 42 > Internet: http://www.climate.unibe.ch/~joos/ -- Jonathan T. Overpeck Director, Institute for the Study of Planet Earth Professor, Department of Geosciences Professor, Department of Atmospheric Sciences Mail and Fedex Address: Institute for the Study of Planet Earth 715 N. Park Ave. 2nd Floor University of Arizona Tucson, AZ 85721 direct tel: +1 520 622-9065 fax: +1 520 792-8795 http://www.geo.arizona.edu/ http://www.ispe.arizona.edu/