date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 12:09:14 -0400 (EDT) from: Barbara Richman subject: Re: Report on Reports to: Phil Jones Dear Phil: Thanks for your prompt e-mail response to my letter. First of all, I'd like to address the month and a half delay in getting back to you. Yes, Tim did talk to you in early September (or very late August). I have been delayed in getting back to you mostly because since Tim spoke with you I have been ill with bronchitis and have not worked a full week since early September. So the blame for the delay is mine, and I am very sorry for that. I appreciate how frustrated you are at that because I have been frustrated in not being able to work as quickly as I usually do. On to the substantive comments... What the editors would like you to do is to add a several paragraphs at the start of the review to state for those readers who are not monitoring the situation daily, as you are, about the state of climate change discussion, to provide the appropriate framework: Discussions re IPCC have been going on for 7 (am I correct in that date?) years; generally there's a consensus, though there are still some disagreements over some points (and list the big ones); but all along there have been naysayers, Michaels as one of the primary ones; the counter-attack consists of these main points; the main naysayers are (identify them); here is the nature of the dialogue (I'm being kind) between the naysayers and others. All of this discussion would serve to put into context the Michaels report. Doing so is especially important because some readers will not have kept track of what is happening and who is saying what. The editors also ask that you provide a description of what is in the Michaels's report: topics covered, what he states, what data he relies on. Then, your evaluation of the report, as laid out in the review that you sent, would be fine and would make sense to those readers (most of them) who have not read the actual report. I'm confident that the foundation work and the description of what is in the report would not take more than half a day for you to lay out. I'm sure that you have all of the information at your fingertips, that it would be a matter of putting on paper. I would also like to suggest a timeframe of the middle of December for this revision. We are looking to put together a special issue on climate change, including a review of each of the three IPCC reports, and that material is due mid December as well. It could make a nice package. Do you think you might be able to carve out a bit of time over the next two months for the revision? I really hope so. Again, my apologies for being so late back to you; it's not my usual course of action. Best, Barb ___________________________________________________________________________ Barbara T. Richman, Managing Editor, Environment 1319 Eighteenth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036-1802 tel: 202-296-6267 ext. 234; fax: 202-296-5149; e-mail: brichman@ciesin.org