Tuesday, April 3, 2012


date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 07:13:31 -0400
from: "markham/dompka" <grasslandatXYZxyzls.com>
subject: Climate scenarios
to: "mike hulme" <m.hulmeatXYZxyz.ac.uk>

Hi Mike,

I'm sorry I didn't get back to you sooner on the global 2-pager. I went
through it in detail over the weekend. I think it is really good, and very
well written already, so I don't have many comments. Here are a few though.

* Please refer to WWF just as WWF, since we have two different names.

* The first para flows really well and makes the point very succinctly. In
the second sentence, however, I think it would be better to take the two
"e.g"s out of brackets and perhaps finsih the sentence "...indicators such
as glacier retreat and longer growing seasons."

* In the second para, could we change the last two words "climatic
environment" down to just one - " climate"?

* In the first paragraph in the second column (the section on the last
century), is it confusing to talk about the two periods of maximum warming?
Critics often talk about the lack of explanation for no warming between
1940 and 1970 as a reason to disregard the warming trend. Maybe you can
clarify, explain or leave out?

* A few things are not mentioned at all (probably taken for read) but maybe
should be. I know they are basic and take up space, but you wouldn't
believe how many times they come up in conversation with policy-makers and
journalists. For example: Greenhouse effect is real; CO2 the major gas; No
debate about increased CO2 in the atmosphere; pre-industrial CO2
concentrations in the atmosphere; number of scientists involved in the
IPCC. Should we also put in the IPCC quote about the "balance of evidence"?

* Is there any space for a couple of blown-up quotes in the margin or
somewehere? If so, I nominate these two - possibly paraphrased to be
shortened in the second case:
1. From 3rd para. The year 1998 was probably the warmest...
2. From 5th para. Recent climate model experiments show that...

* Somewhere I'd like a stronger sentence/reference to possibly
biodiversity, wildlife or species loss. As far as I can see, it only gets a
very vague mention " ...consequences...natural ecosystems...are large" in
the first para on the second page. I'd like to get in somewhere, at a
minimum, that the rate and magnitude of change may be so great that many
ecosystems and species of wildlife may not be able to adapt. This should
probably be earlier rather than later (i.e.on the first page?, first

Can we put a contact number for our climate campaign on? And our (and your)
website url?

I like the general tone. It's clear, yet straight and scientific. So lets
go ahead.

On contracts. I'm really sorry about the mess and will try to start sorting
this out this morning when I get into work (you can call or e-mail me
there). Just remind me though, this contract did not account for the
publication, printing and distribution did it? WWF-UK seems to be confused
about this and now I am too. Apologies again - maybe next time, I'll pay
the university overheads. Adam

No comments:

Post a Comment