cc: k.briffa@uea.ac.uk, jto@u.arizona.edu, Valerie.Masson@cea.fr, ricardo@lab.cricyt.edu.ar date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 11:13:01 -0700 from: Jonathan Overpeck subject: Re: Glaciers Ch 6 to: Jansen@geo.uib.no, olgasolomina@yandex.ru Hi Olga, Eystein and friends - this does sound good. Lonnie and Ellen are working fast on something, and they have asked a couple colleagues to help. This sounds like a nice complement to what you describe. We should see what they have by tomorrow I think, and then, hopefully have what we what. But, Eystein says it nice below - a cross-cutting box that would replace glacier-related text in both 6.3.2.1 (last 2000 years) and 6.3.2.2 (Holocene). That said, nothing is set in stone until we have general agreement. However, given the impact of the glacier story, putting it in a box should be powerful. thanks! Peck >Dear Olga, >My suggestion would be, and I believe this is echoed by Peck, is that the box >we produce comes in the overall Holocene sub-chapter, thus to avoid >repetition. The figure should mainly give syntheses of the glacier extent >variations through the Holocene, if possible, or a fraction of it if data only >exists e.g. for the last few millennia, for those regions where there is a >reliable data set. Then with text explaining what we think drove these >variations. I think it should be a box in Ch6, and could also include the >recent trends I have just talked with Atle and he is able to contribute >curves for Scandinavia and the Alps into a figure before the end of the week >(in a couple of days). He feels putting something together for North America >and perhaps New Zealand is feasible, but he cannot do this before the ZOD >deadline. Perhaps you might be able? If we get something for the tropics from >Lonnie and Ellen and what you have, I will be able to put this together in a >figure for the box via assistance here. We can in such a figure leave space >open for curves we anticipate including for the First Draft. >It might be a good idea to in this figure also include the recent, >instrumental evidence for the same regions, akin to what will be in Ch4, and >of course, in the next iteration come back to possible joint Ch4 and 6 figure. > >How does this sound? > >Cheers, >Eystein -- 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/