cc: p.jones@uea.ac.uk,c.goodess@uea.ac.uk, "Keith Briffa" date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:59:38 +0100 from: Tim Osborn subject: Re: [Fwd: Climate discussion on Friday] to: P.Jones@uea.ac.uk Phil, At 08:02 30/04/2009, P.Jones@uea.ac.uk wrote: > Tim, > Seems fine! Change Humidity to Relative Humidity. ok > Also there is responding to the skeptic claims > - as Andrew Dlugolecki has had to do. But is this a key "research question" for the next 10 years? I tried instead to cover it by indicating that there is still more to learn about the physical climate behaviour and there may be surprises that need to be understood. > This can be media, journal papers etc. Why it hasn't > warmed much over the last few years is one such thing. > > Solar Constant now is 1361 W/m*m! AR5 runs will go with > whatever they have now, as it will take modelling centres > 1-2 years to retune their models. Most have 1366-1370! Interesting. Is this a general downward revision of the solar constant throughout recent decades, or is it that the current solar output is actually 5 W/m**2 in 2009 than it was in, say, 2003? This would be a major radiative forcing! 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