Tuesday, December 27, 2011


From: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>
To: mann@psu.edu
Subject: Re: Thompson et al paper
Date: Thu May 22 09:28:52 2008
Cc: Gavin Schmidt <gschmidt@giss.nasa.gov>

Mike, Gavin,
OK - as long as you're not critical and remember the embargo. I'll expect Nature
will be sending the paper around later today to the press embargoed till the middle
of next week.
Attached is the pdf. This is the final one bar page and volume numbers. Also
attached is our latest draft press release. This is likely OK except for the last
which we're still working on. There will also be a News and Views item from
Dick Reynolds and a Nature news piece from Quirin Schiermeier. I don't have either
of these. I did speak to Quirin on Tuesday and he's also spoke to Dave and John.
It took me a while to explain the significance of the paper. I hope to get these later
two items before I might have to do any interviews early next week. We have
a bank holiday on Monday in the UK. The press release will go out jointly from
the Met Office and UEA - not sure exactly when.
Potentially the key issue is the final Nature sentence which alludes to the probable
underestimation of SSTs in the last few years. Drifters now measuring SSTs dominate
by over 2 to 1 cf ships. Drifters likely measure SSTs about 0.1 to 0.2 deg C cooler
than ships, so we could be underestimating SSTs and hence global T. I hope Dick
will discuss this more. It also means that the 1961-90 average SST that people use
to force/couple with models is slightly too warm. Ship-based SSTs are in decline - lots
of issues related to the shipping companies wanting the locations of the ships
kept secret, also some minor issues of piracy as well. You might want to talk to Scott
more about this.
A bit of background. Loads more UK WW2 logs have been digitized and these will
be going or have gone into ICOADS. These logs cover the WW2 years as well
as the late 1940s up to about 1950. It seems that all of these require bucket corrections.
My guess will be that the period from 1945-49 will get raised by up to 0.3 deg C for the
SSTs, so about 0.2 for the combined. In digitizing they have concentrated on the
South Atlantic/Indian Ocean log books.
[1]http://brohan.org/hadobs/digitised_obs/docs/ and click on SST to see some
The periods mentioned here don't seem quite right as more later 1940s logs have also been
digitized. There are more log books to digitize for WW2 - they have done about half of
not already done.
If anyone wonders where all the RN ships came from, many of those in the S.
oceans were originally US ships. The UK got these through the Churchill/Roosevelt deal in
Occasionally some ships needed repairs and the UK didn't have the major parts, so
this will explain the voyages of a few south of OZ and NZ across the Pacific to Seattle
and then back into the fray.
ICOADS are looking into a project to adjust/correct all their log books.
Also attaching a ppt from Scott Woodruff. Scott knows who signed this!
If you want me to look through anything then email me.
I have another paper just accepted in JGR coming out on Chinese temps
and urbanization. This will also likely cause a stir. I'll send you a copy when
I get the proofs from AGU. Some of the paper relates to the 1990 paper
and the fraud allegation against Wei-Chyung Wang. Remind me on this in
a few weeks if you hear nothing.
PS CRU/Tyndall won a silver medal for our garden at the Chelsea Flower Show -
the theme of the show this year was the changing climate and how it affects gardening.
Clare Goodess was at the garden on Tuesday. She said she never stopped
for her 4 hour stint of talking to the public - only one skeptic. She met the environment
She was talking about the high and low emissions garden. The minister (Phil Woolas)
seemed to think that the emissions related to the ability of the plants to extract
CO2 from the atmosphere! He'd also not heard of the UHI! Still lots of education
PPS Our web server has found this piece of garbage - so wrong it is unbelievable that
Tim Ball wrote a decent paper in Climate Since AD 1500. I sometimes wish I'd never
said this about the land stations in an email. Referring to Alex von Storch just
shows how up to date he is.
At 20:12 21/05/2008, Michael Mann wrote:

Hi Phil,
Gavin and I have been discussing, we think it will be important for us to do something
on the Thompson et al paper as soon as it appears, since its likely that naysayers are
going to do their best to put a contrarian slant on this in the blogosphere.
Would you mind giving us an advance copy. We promise to fully respect Nature's embargo
(i.e., we wouldn't post any article until the paper goes public) and we don't expect to
in any way be critical of the paper. We simply want to do our best to help make sure
that the right message is emphasized.
thanks in advance for any help!
Michael E. Mann
Associate Professor
Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC)

Department of Meteorology Phone: (814) 863-4075
503 Walker Building FAX: (814) 865-3663
The Pennsylvania State University email: [3]mann@psu.edu
University Park, PA 16802-5013


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 p.jones@uea.ac.uk


1. http://brohan.org/hadobs/digitised_obs/docs/
2. http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3151
3. mailto:mann@psu.edu
4. http://www.met.psu.edu/dept/faculty/mann.htm

No comments:

Post a Comment