Sunday, May 13, 2012

4174.txt

cc: jto@u.arizona.edu, eystein.jansen@geo.uib.no, Fortunat Joos <joosatXYZxyzmate.unibe.ch>, Tim Osborn <t.osbornatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, drind@giss.nasa.gov, Henry Pollack <hpollackatXYZxyzch.edu>
date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 19:15:54 +0100
from: Stefan Rahmstorf <rahmstorfatXYZxyzan-klima.de>
subject: Re: latest draft of 2000-year section text
to: Keith Briffa <k.briffaatXYZxyz.ac.uk>

<x-flowed>
Hi Keith,

will try to look at your text asap. Concerning the issue of the drift in
the Von Storch run: they now have at least one paper plus one submitted
comment where they redid their model run without the drift, they call
this ECHO-G II, the version with drift is now ECHO-G I. I think this
argues for leaving the ECHO-G I curve out of the graphs, and just having
one sentence in the text stating this is not shown as it was found to
drift, and has been superseded. It is an outlier that messes up the
graph, and if it is known and even acknowledged by its authors that it
is a model artifact, why show it in IPCC?

Stefan

</x-flowed>

No comments:

Post a Comment