date: Tue Aug 9 17:21:11 2005 from: Keith Briffa subject: Section on last 2000-years to: jto@u.arizona.edu,eystein.jansen@geo.uib.no Peck and Eystein in case you tried (!), my phone has been broken for the last few days (yes - honestly). I am sorry I had to rush off - and stay longer than I had anticipated . [[[redacted: family]]] Given the time constraint , this "final" revision is not as considered as it might have been , but we have tried to take into account all comments available , and have given considerable attention to the IPCC terminology and emphasis on the bullet points . At this stage , however, there are some clear areas where future work will be required to keep abreast of recent developments and , perhaps, to re-balance the emphasis and structure. I apologise for not having responded directly to Fortunat, Stefan, Ricardo.Olga, David and Tom, but please be aware that I have considered all of their comments and done what I could to address them .Thanks Fortunat and Ricardo (and Ed - who should be added to the list of CAs) for the text and Figures and Henry and Jason for the help and data . David's suggestions about re-ordering the paragraphs was particularly difficult to resolve in my own mind , because I do see the logic , but equally , did not want to interfere with the time line approach to describing post- TAR work that underlies the current structure. as you can see I decided to leave the order as it was. It would be great if David and Fortunat could check cross Chapter referencing (eg in relation to forcings and detection chapters). We can revisit this , and the issue of McIntyre and McKitrick (centering of PCs in Mann et al reconstruction - which is clearly unfounded) until such time as the numerous responses are published. The new SH section is in , and the MWP box slightly amended to take account of the new Figure. Peck, I have considered your text on the regional section - and you will see that I have edited out some relating to future (and association between drought and SSTs) . I feel strongly that you are venturing into "observational" territory and speculation beyond what we should say. I have also amended the bullet points to reflect this. YOU ARE THE ULTIMATE ARBITERS and it is up to you if you wish to re-insert , but I will give you a continuing argument later about our overstepping the "paleo" boundary. Note also that the bullet on European summer 2004 has bee altered to reflect what was a last minute , one-sentence , insertion in the first paragraph regarding Jurg Lutterbacher's Science paper - as there was no mention of it otherwise. We had to remove the reference to "700 years in France" as I am not sure what this is , and it is not in the text anyway. The use of "likely" , "very likely" and my additional fudge word "unusual" are all carefully chosen where used. Tim has been a rock in the last minute rush here - not only doing the Figures , but also helping with the text. I am really grateful to him. He has sent the text , with some comments, and highlighted references, that need attention. If Oyvind can identify references and handle these problems with Endnote , we are also really grateful. The final references , if missing , are probably in the current text, the previous Endnote library , or in sections of text sent by Ricardo, Fortunat, Peck and Eystein. I trust when you guys have stiched the new text back in and the Figures etc. we will perhaps get a last chance to correct and check references etc. Thanks Keith -- Professor Keith Briffa, Climatic Research Unit University of East Anglia Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K. Phone: +44-1603-593909 Fax: +44-1603-507784 [1]http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/