To: Caspar Ammann <email@example.com>
Subject: Fwd: Re: pseudo-proxies for the climate reconstruction challenge
Date: Thu Jul 20 15:33:31 2006
I should also say, Caspar, that I've not forwarded any documents to Philip yet with more
details about the challenge. I thought that you should do that instead, because you will
have (more likely) kept track of where the latest version is.
I forgot to forward to you Philip Brohan's positive response to my invitation for him to be
involved in the production of pseudo-proxy and pseudo-instrumental data for the climate
It is copied below and you can find his contact details below too.
Subject: Re: pseudo-proxies for the climate reconstruction challenge
To: Tim Osborn <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: email@example.com, Keith Briffa <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:08:54 +0100
Thanks for your notes from the workshop. It sounds both interesting and
very positive - I was afraid that the relations between the participants
would break down completely, but you've clearly made good progress.
I think a blind test of reconstruction methods is an excellent idea,
and I'm happy to support it in any capacity. I've done this before with
nuclear fuel performance models, and the results were both alarming and
instructive. Doing it properly won't be easy though, I think several
different stretches of model simulation will be required.
So yes - volunteer me to Caspar (or the organising committee) to make
pseudo-proxy and pseudo-instrumental data.
On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 16:48, Tim Osborn wrote:
> Hi Philip (cc Simon & Keith),
> Please read my report-back from Wengen workshop first. You'll see
> that a "climate reconstruction challenge" was suggested and that this
> would be a "blind" test where participating groups would not know
> what the real answer is.
> Caspar Ammann would provide and keep secret a suitable model
> simulation. But we discussed who should make the pseudo-proxy data
> from the model output. I wondered whether you (Philip) would be
> interested in this, given your experience with the instrumental error
> model and interest in statistical models for proxy error. What do
> you think of this idea, Philip? A number of proxy people, including
> us, might liaise with you about how such an error model might be
> structured, but ultimately we would not be allowed to know precise
> details about how you generated a set of pseudo-proxies otherwise we
> wouldn't be allowed to take part in the challenge ourselves.
> Would you be interested in participating in this "challenge" in this
> way, and have time to do so? It would preclude you from entering the
> challenge of course.
> Please let me know and I will liaise with whoever else is involved in
> organising this challenge (at least Caspar, but it's not yet clear who else).
Philip Brohan, Climate Scientist
Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research
Tel: +44 (0)1392 884574 Fax: +44 (0)1392 885681
Global climate data sets are available from http://www.hadobs.org