Tuesday, May 8, 2012


cc: oyvind.paascheatXYZxyz.uib.no
date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 22:27:20 +0200
from: Eystein Jansen <Eystein.JansenatXYZxyz.uib.no>
subject: Re: urgent IPCC need
to: Keith Briffa <k.briffaatXYZxyz.ac.uk>

OK, but please not later than Monday!

>i have to leave for austria now for a week - on
>monday next will send result of consultation for
>text change regrading the von storch paragraph
>of our chapter, after discussion with Stefan and
>john Mitchell - please wait til then
>At 16:13 01/09/2006, you wrote:
>>dear All, thanks for being alert.
>>I think we have an agreement that Martin�s
>>comments are useful, but that we should change
>>only those sentences where they clarify.
>>Otherwise i agree with Stefan and Keith�s
>>statements below.
>>At 15:45 +0100 01-09-06, Keith Briffa wrote:
>>>I forgot to say that I too disagree with
>>>removing the first sentence re simulations
>>>being consistent with reconstructed NH temps.
>>>As Sefan says we need the context , and our
>>>results are independent of Chapter 9 in this
>>>At 15:37 01/09/2006, Stefan Rahmstorf wrote:
>>>>Hi Peck,
>>>>Martin as in Manning? I have found his
>>>>feedback very useful so far, so we should
>>>>definitely look at what he suggests - he
>>>>mostly tends to look for whether our
>>>>sentences are clear. Obviously, he cannot
>>>>suggest real changes in meaning, only issues
>>>>of clarity, but the latter I would take very
>>>>seriously. Mostly I find his small rewordings
>>>>good, I comment on the larger points and
>>>>exceptions below.
>>>>- I am against deleting the bullet on speed
>>>>of deglacial change. This point is extremely
>>>>effective. Just two days ago an oil industry
>>>>person told me that there have been big
>>>>natural climate changes like ice ages in the
>>>>past, hence we need not worry. I responded
>>>>that the biggest warming in recent climate
>>>>history was the end of the last Ice Age - but
>>>>that warming by about 5 �C took about 5,000
>>>>years, not a hundred. "Oh" he said, "Really
>>>>so long? I didn't know that." I think it is a
>>>>very important point, we need to make it.
>>>>Maybe not in term of "average rate", may we
>>>>should just say: the warming of 4-7 �C took
>>>>about 5,000 years, as compared to a future
>>>>change of up to the same magnitude within a
>>>>- Next ice age bullet in 30k seems fine to me.
>>>>- exceptional warmth: the SPM said:
>>>>20th C T increase likely the largest in a
>>>>millennium - that is strengthened (perhaps
>>>>very likely now?)
>>>>1990s likely the warmest decade in a
>>>>millennium - that again is strengthened
>>>>1998 likely the warmest year - I'd say this
>>>>is unchanged (except for 2005 challenging
>>>>it), likely is only 66%! Even though the
>>>>annual proxy data may be uncertain, as a
>>>>physicist I would find it unlikely that there
>>>>is a mechanism to cause a big warm outlier
>>>>year that beats 1998 from a much cooler
>>>>background state. How would that work - where
>>>>would the heat come from?
>>>>So in my view we could actually say that
>>>>these past SPM statements held up or were
>>>>strengthened - but in fact I also like the
>>>>bullet as it is.
>>>>- Paleoclimate model simulations are broadly
>>>>consistent with the reconstructed NH
>>>>temperatures over the past 1000 years. The
>>>>rise in surface temperatures since 1950 very
>>>>likely cannot be reproduced without including
>>>>anthropogenic greenhouse gases in the model
>>>>forcings, and it is very unlikely that this
>>>>warming was merely a recovery from the
>>>>pre-20th century cold period.
>>>>On this I disagree with deleting the first
>>>>sentence, as the second one needs it to
>>>>follow logically. And why should the paleo
>>>>chapter suddenly make a statement on
>>>>post-1950 warming, if it is not in the
>>>>context of the past millennium?
>>>>Cheers, Stefan
>>>>To reach me directly please use:
>>>>(My former addresses @pik-potsdam.de are read by my assistant Brigitta.)
>>>>Stefan Rahmstorf
>>>Professor Keith Briffa,
>>>Climatic Research Unit
>>>University of East Anglia
>>>Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.
>>>Phone: +44-1603-593909
>>>Fax: +44-1603-507784
>>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
>Professor Keith Briffa,
>Climatic Research Unit
>University of East Anglia
>Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.
>Phone: +44-1603-593909
>Fax: +44-1603-507784

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

No comments:

Post a Comment