date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:43:52 +0200
from: Fortunat Joos <joosatXYZxyzmate.unibe.ch>
subject: Re: [Wg1-ar4-ch06] Chapter 6 Contributing authors plus other
to: Jonathan Overpeck <jtoatXYZxyzrizona.edu>
Hi Peck and Eystein,
Bergen Hotels are reserved from Saturday to Saturday.
> 4) we need to be more proactive in letting our CA's see the Chap 6 SOD,
> and soliciting comments. Since the CA's can serve as expert reviewers on
> the chapter they authored, we propose that we (Eystein and Peck) send
> the attached versions to each CA with a note that we want them to have a
> SOD copy to check, and that we'd appreciate any comments by the first of
> June. We will ask that all comments be organized major section by
> section, so that we can then get the chap. 6 LA responsible for each
> major section the comments. Does anyone think this is a bad plan, or a
> plan that could be improved? Obviously, we have to say we're sorry for
> not listing all the CAs on the SOD, but that this will be fixed. In
> order to make sure we don't make the situation worse, PLEASE SEND me the
> name AND email of each CA, so we can ensure our master list is what
> �yvind and the TSU have. In our email to CA's, we will also list all of
I think it is an excellent idea to invite all the contributors to the
review process and thank them for their contribution they have made so
far. However, the suggested plan is very difficult as it bypass the
official review process and the Review Editors. This has the potential
to cause a lot of trouble with some that do not like IPCC as we do. We
need to be very careful on procedural grounds. I suggest that you check
with Susan on this point, but to me it seems mandatory that comments are
sent through the official web page.
It might be preferable if the CA get a mail that points out their
important role so far in the process and pointing them to the IPCC
reviewer's page. As an extra service, one could think of attaching the
pdf (or the word document) of our chapter and the exceel review sheet,
but making it very clear that the comments have to be send to IPCC and
not to chap 6.
Here the list of Contributing Authors from my side:
Katsumi Matsumoto <katsumiatXYZxyz.edu>
helped with glacial CO2
Raimund Muscheler <raimundatXYZxyzmate.gsfc.nasa.gov>
helped with solar
EMICS last millennium modellers:
Gian-Kasper Plattner <plattneratXYZxyzmate.unibe.ch>
Anders Leverman levermannatXYZxyz-potsdam.de
Eva Bauer baueratXYZxyz-potsdam.de
There are also people that have provided some data or other 'minor'
things during the process. I believe that it would be very useful to
contact these, although they will not be listed as contributing authors.
In particular one should mention that they have contributed to the
development of the SOD and previous drafts and that the chapter 6 team
wants to thank them.
Have provided their published sulfate data:
Hubertus Fischer <hufischeratXYZxyz-bremerhaven.de>
Mathias Bigler bigleratXYZxyz.ku.dk
Emilian Castellano emiliano.castellanoatXYZxyzfi.it
Eric Wolf EWWOatXYZxyz.ac.uk
Roberto Udisti roberto.udistiatXYZxyzfi.it
Margrit Schwikowski margit.schwikowskiatXYZxyz.ch
Dan Murphy Daniel.M.MurphyatXYZxyza.gov
Have provided published GHG data:
provided published solar forcing data
judith Lean jleanatXYZxyz5.nrl.navy.mil
Provided some help with abrupt event figure
Thomas Blunier tblunieratXYZxyzmate.unibe.ch
5) what about LA's reviewing our own chapter? Since we can't expert
> review our chapter, we propose that each chap 6 LA do the same as we are
> requesting of the CA's. Although most of you have already commented all
> you wanted to on the SOD, there may be some issues you want to make sure
> we don't forget about as we start to deal with the next/last draft of
> the chapter. Is this plan a good one?
This sounds good.
> Ok, that's plenty for today. Again, thanks for working to free up time
> this summer (and likely early fall) for the next draft - we are close to
> a truly ground-breaking document, and we want to make sure the next
> draft is flawless.
> Best, Peck and Eystein
>> Hi Fortunat, this must be an error inflicted in the final stages of
>> the SOD. All FOD CAs should have been listed also in the SOD. We will
>> ensure this is redone for the final version.
>> Best wishes,
>> At 08:58 +0200 18-04-06, Fortunat Joos wrote:
>>> Hi Peck and Eystein,
>>> Any idea why some listed as CA for the FOD are not listed anymore as
>>> contributing authors in the SOD?
>>> This creates awkward situations as some have indicated to the
>>> outside world job interviews, NSF proposals) that they serve(d) as
>>> contributing author.
>>> My suggestion is to include all in the final list of contributing
>>> authors that have contributed to the FOD or SOD.
>>> Cheers, Fortunat
>>> 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/
>> Eystein Jansen
>> Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research and
>> Dep. of Earth Science, Univ. of Bergen
>> All�gaten 55
>> N-5007 Bergen
>> e-mail: eystein.jansenatXYZxyz.uib.no
>> Phone: +47-55-583491 - Home: +47-55-910661
>> Fax: +47-55-584330
> Wg1-ar4-ch06 mailing list
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
Wg1-ar4-ch06 mailing list