To: email@example.com, joos <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Eystein Jansen <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, Keith Briffa <email@example.com>
Subject: Fwd: some figures at last!
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 12:21:17 -0700
Hi Stefan and Fortunat: Attached are the draft figs that include
proxy obs, simulations, and comparisons of the two. As you can see,
Tim just sent them. Big job, but they look great in my eyes.
See Tim's email below for more background info.
We need fast feedback from you both, specifically:
1) any general comments on the figs - this is a crux set of figures
and we need your eyes to look at them carefully
2) is it wise to keep the new EMIC run panel attached to the second
figure as attached? I vote yes, but what do you think. It fits w/ the
other panels pretty well.
3) either way, we need caption prose from you (perhaps Fortunat
start, and Stefan edit, or vice versa if Stefan can start first) on
the new EMIC panel.
4) also, we need a new para, or prose that can be added to a para,
that describes the panel and it's implications as it informs our
assessment. Keith will then integrate this into the section. I'm not
sure of this, but perhaps you could start with a new question
heading, and then have a short para to go under it - something like
"What is the significance of the new reduced-amplitude estimates of
past solar variability?"
Of course, we need your feedback and prose asap. Please send to me,
Eystein, Keith and Tim.
Thanks in advance for the help. Best, peck
>X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
>Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 18:00:19 +0000
>To: Jonathan Overpeck <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
> Eystein Jansen <email@example.com>
>From: Tim Osborn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Subject: some figures at last!
>Cc: Keith Briffa <email@example.com>
>Dear Peck and Eystein,
>the attached word file contains the latest versions of two of our figures.
>First, is the reconstructions with many requests now done: linear
>time scale, dotted early instrumental temperatures not solid line,
>Oerlemans added, new panel showing shading for the overlapping
>regions of temperature reconstructions.
>Second, is the forcings and models. Stendel ECHAM simulation added
>(1500-2000). New ECHO-G Erik2 simulation just published in GRL from
>Gonzalez-Ruoco et al. added (1000-1990). Reconstruction "envelope"
>replaced by new shading of overlaps in the temperature
>reconstructions. Correction of some labelling errors. Those runs
>that did not include 20th century sulphate aerosol cooling are
>dotted or dashed after 1900 (the two low ones also omitted CH4, N2O,
>CFCs, O3, hence still cool despite omitting aerosol cooling). The
>ECHO-G Erik1 simulation with the very out-of-equilibrium initial
>conditions is dashed. Finally, the extra panel with the new EMIC
>runs is included as panel (e), again with the new shading of
>overlapping temperature reconstructions.
>Keith suggests sending to Stefan and Fortunat too for their views -
>can you do that (they may now be gone for the weekend, of course).
>Best wishes and sorry this is late. Am I right in thinking that the
>only other possible-TS figure is the location maps? Still working
>on those (had very little time in last 2 days due to media etc.
>attention re. Science paper).
>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
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
Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\figures_2000yr_10feb20061.doc"