Monday, May 21, 2012


cc: Keith Briffa <>,
date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 10:36:09 -0700
from: Jonathan Overpeck <>
subject: Re: Fwd: new fig
to: Eystein Jansen <>

Great, thanks! Since that fig is TS bound, it
would be ideal to get the data to Keith/Tim by
early next week. Thx again! Peck

>I can contact Oerlemans, have met him a few times.
>>thanks for this - the new runs I think best in a separate panel .
>>At 16:44 03/02/2006, Jonathan Overpeck wrote:
>>>Hi Keith and Tim (and Eystein): Your new
>>>figure is quite compelling, and a nice
>>>complement to the other two panels. I agree it
>>>would be good to get the Northern Hem
>>>Oerleman's plot - Eystein do you know him well
>>>enough to ask? (I never even met him, but
>>>could ask if you don't know him).
>>>What you have created will take some good work
>>>on the caption to explain, but it has my vote.
>>>What is your plan for dealing with the new
>>>German/Swiss model results? A new figure? Are
>>>you sure these runs can't be worked in,
>>>perhaps as a new panel? At least we have
>>>Susan's support for the new runs, so we do
>>>what we have to do.
>>>As for work and time, we are running out. Just
>>>do the best you can, and hopefully the new
>>>section will emerge sometime next week.
>>>Highest priority (please do first) - we need 3
>>>TS-contender figures (and captions) by early
>>>next week:
>>>1) the new fig showing all the sites used in the recons - with caption
>>>2) the fig you've attached to this email -
>>>with caption (were we going to try to put all
>>>the model runs/refs/color key into a table, so
>>>the caption could be shorter than in the FOD?
>>>Think this would be better, so caption is
>>>3) the new fig comparing the obs to the model
>>>runs (update of the fig we showed for first
>>>time in ChCh - using a version of the lower
>>>panel you attached to this email - with caption
>>>There is little doubt you guys have the
>>>hardest job of all LAs in our chapter, and
>>>possibly the entire WG1 report. Your work will
>>>have huge impact, and the extra effort is
>>>really appreciated well beyond me and Eystein.
>>>I wish we could offer up a time machine to
>>>make it easier, but... just keep plugging.
>>>thanks! Peck
>>>>Peck and Eystein
>>>>we are having trouble to express the real
>>>>message of the reconstructions - being
>>>>scientifically sound in representing
>>>>uncertainty , while still getting the crux of
>>>>the information across clearly. It is not
>>>>right to ignore uncertainty, but expressing
>>>>this merely in an arbitrary way (and as a
>>>>total range as before) allows the uncertainty
>>>>to swamp the magnitude of the changes through
>>>>time . We have settled on this version
>>>>(attached) of the Figure which we hoe you
>>>>will agree gets the message over but with the
>>>>rigor required for such an important document.
>>>>We have added a box to show the "probability
>>>>surface" for the most likely estimate of past
>>>>temperatures based on all published data. By
>>>>overlapping all reconstructions and giving a
>>>>score of 2 to all areas within the 1 standard
>>>>error range of the estimates for each
>>>>reconstruction , and a score of 1 for the
>>>>area between 1 and 2 standard errors, you
>>>>build up a composite picture of the most
>>>>likely or "concensus" path that temperatures
>>>>took over the last 1200 years (note - now
>>>>with a linear time axis). This still shows
>>>>the outlier ranges , preserving all the
>>>>information, but you see the central most
>>>>likely area well , and the comparison of past
>>>>and recent temperature levels is not as
>>>>influenced by the outlier estimates. What do
>>>>you think? We have experimented with
>>>>different versions of the shading and this
>>>>one shows up quite well - but we may have to
>>>>use some all grey version as the background
>>>>to the overlay of the model results.
>>>>We have also experimented with changing the
>>>>normalisation base for the
>>>>model/reconstruction Figure , but using the
>>>>same short modern period as for the first
>>>>Figure is not satisfactory - more on this
>>>>later. We have added in Oerlemans curve as
>>>>many insisted - but we only have the GLOBAL
>>>>curve - can you get the separate North and
>>>>Southern Hemisphere curves (with uncertainty)
>>>>. I do not see that the new model runs from
>>>>Germany/Switzerland will fit easily in the
>>>>existing Figure and need to be separate! I am
>>>>really struggling with the text also - really
>>>>need more time!!!! More later
>>>>>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version
>>>>>Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 10:42:15 +0000
>>>>>To: Keith Briffa <>
>>>>>From: Tim Osborn <>
>>>>>Subject: new fig
>>>>>Dr Timothy J Osborn
>>>>>Climatic Research Unit
>>>>>School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia
>>>>>Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK
>>>>>phone: +44 1603 592089
>>>>>fax: +44 1603 507784
>>>>Professor Keith Briffa,
>>>>Climatic Research Unit
>>>>University of East Anglia
>>>>Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.
>>>>Phone: +44-1603-593909
>>>>Fax: +44-1603-507784
>>>>Attachment converted: Macintosh
>>>>HD:ipcc_nhrecon_new1.pdf (PDF /�IC�)
>>>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
>>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
>Phone: +47-55-583491 - Home: +47-55-910661
>Fax: +47-55-584330

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

No comments:

Post a Comment