Sunday, December 18, 2011


From: Stefan Rahmstorf <>
To: David Rind <>
Subject: Re: [Wg1-ar4-ch06] Comments on Section 6.3
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 12:39:05 +0200
Cc: Eystein Jansen <>

Dear chapter 6 friends,
I have a request on procedure. In the interest of a good and constructive working
atmosphere, I would suggest that all of us focus on sober scientific arguments and refrain
from unneccessarily derogatory comments about the work of colleagues. I'm referring in this
case to David's comment

- this reference is overused, especially for such a simplistic model

The reference concerned is our theory of DO events which appeared in Nature in 2001 and has
since been cited 133 times according to the Web of Science (a sign of overuse?) The model
concerned is the CLIMBER-2 model, featured in over 50 peer-reviewed publications since
1998, including 7 in Nature and Science.
This model is different from David's model, because it has been constructed for a
differenet purpose, but it is not "simplistic". It would never occur to me to call David's
model "simplistic" because it does not include an interactive continental ice sheet model,
vegetation model, carbon cycle model, sediment model and isotope model.
I'm absolutely open to any rational scientific criticism and discussion, but I can see no
purpose in derogatory statements like the above, which include not even a trace of
scientific argument. This kind of thing only poisons the working atmosphere in our group,
which I thought was very positive and a great pleasure in Beijing.
Regards, Stefan
To reach me directly please use: [1]
(My former addresses are read by my assistant Brigitta.)

Stefan Rahmstorf

_______________________________________________ Wg1-ar4-ch06 mailing list



No comments:

Post a Comment