Sunday, June 17, 2012


date: Thu Jul 10 17:19:13 2008
from: Phil Jones <>
subject: Re: AW: my definite draft version posed to discussion,
to: David Frank <>

The Pyrenees record sounds a useful inclusion - they aren't that far from the Alps.
I'm keen to only use results from papers that have produced a reconstruction.
I'm aware of what Keith and Tom are doing here with others from the old project,
but this work is still ongoing.
So maybe you can send the Pyrenees reconstruction, or should I contact Ulf.
Reinhard is supposed to be sending me some more series he has collected.
This may include the lakes stuff you mention.
Rob Wilson's work if there is a reconstruction would be useful.
Smoothing the series highlights the differences more than the plot in your abstract
where the interannual timescale is highlighted.
At 17:03 09/07/2008, you wrote:

Hi Phil,
Perhaps other T-records not on the list might include: Rob Wilson's compilation for the
Alps used in D'Arrigo et al. 2006 and additional glacial records from
Haberli/Holzhauser. I guess Keith and Tom were working towards putting together lots of
long-term tree-ring data including material from the WSL, Grabner & Nicolussi (Austria),
Urbinati/Carrer (Italy) for a definitive Alpine tree-ring reconstruction. Either such a
composite or some of these individual records should be included. If not loosing the
spatial focus to much for you, it might also be reasonable to consider Ulf's new
reconstruction for the Pyrenees (in press at Clim Dyn). There is a a bunch of stuff from
lakes recently published (Alex Blass / Martin Grosjean), but i am not too familiar with
We are currently producing a composite record of different MXD chronologies (Ulf's
L�tschental, the old Lauenen record, and some newer data from Kurt Nicolussi from Tirol
- Keith and Tom have these records) but focusing on extremes rather than long-term
variations. The goal is to compare this with Pfisters work. Giovanna Battipaglia (a
post doc) is working on this.
Many people are starting to measure longer isotope series from tree-rings. However, I am
not sure if /when these might turn into formal climate reconstructions....
Not sure if this helps much. At least the list of "usual suspects" is slowly lengthening
with time!
I attach an abstract that i put together for a meeting. This was closely related to some
text/work that i did in thinking about the proxy-instrumental comparisons and Reinhards
current paper.
At 15:22 Uhr +0100 9.7.2008, Phil Jones wrote:

I have plans to write-up what was planned at the end of ALP-IMP.
This was what was in WP9. I have a draft paper from almost 2 years ago.
Reinhard is going to send me all the proxy data/sources that he
has collected in the last year or so. I still have Dimitrios
here and he has started doing some plots and correlations.
For trees we have the series from Ulf's papers which have
publication dates in 2005 and 2006. Are there others that we should be
using? I wanted to mainly stick to the GAR and continental Europe.
Not keen to go much further afield with more distant proxies. Also
trying to stick to the period since 1500. Apart from Ulf's series
we also have the grape-harvest dates from Meier and Chiune et al,
Jurg Luterbacher's reconstructions, Mangini et al's stalagmite
and also the Oerlemans reconstruction based on glacier lengths.
If there are others you think we should be using, can you point us
to papers or to the data.
At 14:37 09/07/2008, David Frank wrote:

Hi Reinhard et al.
I made some additional suggestions /sentence shortenings for your final consideration. I
too am happy for you to submit, but let me know if i can be of further help.
I guess you have avoided any discussion about the larger-scale implications from this
work. If you and Phil don't have larger plans in this direction, it might be reasonable
to include this in the discussion and abstract.
Its an honor to be involved with this work/collaboration. I've enjoyed and learned a
best wishes,
At 13:45 Uhr +0100 8.7.2008, Phil Jones wrote:

A few minor changes. The one sentence in green in the small file needs
more work.
Happy for you to submit when ready.
At 15:43 07/07/2008, Reinhard Boehm wrote:

Dear Michele,
Thanks for your input. I have changed Fig.14 according to your suggestion
(without ISAC-ori now), have changed also the respective sentence where
ISAC-oris are addressed and have included your new passage about the ISAC
series. Have a look at the attached respective passage, all in green is new.
Thank You also for the Meier et all correction, I have received the true
reference from J�rg Luterbacher already.
-----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: michele [[1]]
Gesendet: Montag, 07. Juli 2008 15:25
An: David Frank
Cc: Phil Jones; Reinhard Boehm; 'michele'; 'Maurizio Maugeri';
Betreff: Re: my definite draft version posed to discussion, correcting and
Dear Reinhard,
Here is a suggestion to change the description of what we did with our
series (it is only one line longer than yours!):
Only Italian series were used for homogeneity testing and adjusting, the
basis were minimum and maximum temperature series and the homogenization
was "nearer to metadata" and verified at each step by checking its
effect on daily temperature range series to avoid undue corrections.
As far as figure 14 is concerned, I suggest to eliminate the orange
curve, i.e. the ISAC-original, this is the only non-homogenized series
we show and I think it makes confusion: you say that it is well within
the range of the other regional series [in the EIP], but you don't
highlight that it is colder in the recent half century. I think that
this can confuse the reader, i.e. he can understand that the
non-homogenized series and the EIP-corrected one are in good agreement,
but this is not true (thik balck and orange are very different).
Finally, Meier et al. (2008), in the introduction is Meier et al.
(2007), GRL vol. 34 issue 20 L20705.
On Fri, Jul 04, 2008 at 05:58:24PM +0200, David Frank wrote:

Dear Reinhard, Phil, et al.
In catching up with emails, it seems like the manuscript is close to a

nice and

final state. I am fine with Reinhards suggestion to co-ordinate a last


through with Phil.
I will be away until Tuesday, so would then be happy to work on the


Some quick thoughts:
I agree with Phil's suggestion to tune figure 14 (given an EPS, i can do


too). Perhaps, e.g., the non EI corrected series could be denoted as

dashed and

each panel to span the entire width of a page.
Also, the final paragraph of the conclusions might fit more nicely in the
discussion. The manuscript could then end more generally about remaining
uncertainties in the Alpine records and also larger-scale implications


Parker 1994).
Have a good weekend.
At 9:28 Uhr +0100 4.7.2008, Phil Jones wrote:
Here's a revised version with a concluding section. You will


to alter some of the conclusions as I may not have emphasized the


I suspect the bit at the end with the Italian adjustments from


Maurizio could do with some tightening up. Figure 14 is crucial to


Is it possible that this can be clearer? The black line dominates.


the black line should be grey, with Inge's 2007 curve being a lighter
Perhaps also it might be better with a legend, so readers can see the
rather than trying to relate your colour words in the caption to

those in

the plot. Maybe I should get a better colour printer!
One other thing just noticed, CRUtem2v should be CRUTEM2v.
The WP9 paper will contain lots of plots that Dimitrios is doing
with the proxy data - ALP-IMP and others, so this paper will have


more authors than this one.
I'm here next week for one more look through if needed. Visitors


rest of
the day and have to move compost bins in the garden at the weekend.
At 15:09 03/07/2008, Reinhard Boehm wrote:
Dear all,
Find attached my definite draft of our common paper. I now have to
concentrate on other things to be done, and I hope to receive your
input to produce a final version until July 15th (latest). I have
completed the main part of the paper, have inserted Phil s summary


received a minute ago and have left undone only the conclusions. I


also inserted all so far received corrections and have tried to


your remarks.
I address Phil first. He has announced to be at CRU these two

weeks and

has reserved some time for our paper. It would be fine to receive


a conclusion from him. And please Phil, have a look at the three
passages marked in green: I had some troubles there to follow your
remarks, but I have produced something new which may be better

now, but

I believe it needs your input.
It would be fine to have David for a general language correction,


also the claimed shorter sentences if necessary. Is this possible?
Maybe after Phil having done his work in order not to produce a

mess of

different versions. Pleas Phil and David discuss and decide about


among yourselves.
Maurizio and Michele are kindly asked to tell if my short passage
introducing and discussing the ISAC-version suits your conception.
Please note that we currently are rather precisely at the maximum


planned for the Millennium paper (40 double spaced pages including


tables and figures). I have already slightly shortened my part,

and I

am afraid we do not have enough place for the entire passage


sent, all the more then we should also say more about the Swedish
series and the other comparative series of Fig. 14.
Please send me your inputs until end of next week latest to allow

us to

produce the final version in the style Climatic Change wants us to


(all figures are already present in the 600dpi version ready for
printing, but I did not insert them into the attached version to


the doc file in reasonable size.)
I hope you all can say yes to what I have produced and do not want


withdraw your names from the author s list. I have avoided to


more pages and more co-authors by excluding the proxies more or


and also the modelling and forcing passage. This does not mean

that I

do not think that a follow-up with a wider comparison of


and proxy evidence available in the region.
Whether this will be part of Phil s planned WP-9 paper of ALP-IMP


whether this will develop into a separate paper is left to Phil s

> decision.

Best regards
And do not hesitate to communicate also with me in the next days

(I am

still here at the institute until 17th July and am very interested


finishing this before).
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email


Attachment converted: MacDave:draft-2008-07-04 1.doc (WDBN/�IC�)


Dr. Michele Brunetti
Via Gobetti, 101
I-40129 Bologna
Ph +39 051 6399623
Fax +39 051 6399658
Personal web page: [2]

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email
UK ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment converted: MacDave:draft-2008-07-06 1.doc (WDBN/�IC�) (0020CB7D)
Attachment converted: MacDave:Micheles-correction-#20CB7E.doc (WDBN/�IC�) (0020CB7E)

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email
UK ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email

No comments:

Post a Comment