To: Christoph Kull <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <EWWO@bas.ac.uk>, <email@example.com>, Janice Lough <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Juerg Luterbacher <email@example.com>, Keith Briffa <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Tim Osborn <email@example.com>, Ricardo Villalba <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Kim Cobb <email@example.com>, Heinz Wanner <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Jonathan Overpeck <email@example.com>, Michael Schulz <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Eystein Jansen <Eystein.Jansen@geo.uib.no>, Nick Graham <email@example.com>, Francis Zwiers <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Caspar Ammann <email@example.com>, "Michael E. Mann" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Gavin Schmidt <email@example.com>, Sandy Tudhope <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Tas van Ommen <email@example.com>, "Wahl, Eugene R" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Brendan Buckley <email@example.com>, Hugues Goosse <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Review Comments on the Wengen paper
Date: Thu Jun 5 13:18:47 2008
Cc: <email@example.com>, Thorsten Kiefer <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Naresh Kumar <NKumar@epri.com>
Dear All (especially Peck!),
Attached are three sets of reviews of the paper - 2 in the pdf file and one in the
small doc file.
As you'll be able to see, there isn't that much to do and the reviews have been
good. All three reviewers seem to be in awe of the group! I've had a brief
discussion with Keith as to who should do what. You're all welcome to help
but I only think most of you will need go through the revised version when we get that
out - hopefully asap. John Matthews is still hopeful of a 2008 publication date,
and you'll see we won't be going out for any further reviews - just John checking.
Many of the comments relate to the tree-ring section and Keith will
deal with these. They involve some re-organization and some additional refs
on dendro isotope work.
The coral and isotope sections get praised for organization - so well done!
I'll need some help with the one coral comment on 'vital effects', so can
Janice, Kim and Sandy work on that. I think it only needs a few sentences
and maybe extra refs. I know some of you are in Trieste next week, so maybe
you can work on it there.
I'll work on the documentary section a bit and liaise with Juerg. This shouldn't
much extra work.
I'll also look at the borehole section together with what was in Ch 6 of AR4.
The major bit of new text we need is on the high-res varves and laminated lake records,
so this is why I highlighted Peck. They aren't used in large-area high-freq climate
reconstructions, so emphasis there and to a few key review papers. Is this doable in
the next couple of weeks, Peck? I don't think more than a page or two is required.
Related to the issue of the different proxies use or potential use in high-freq
reconstructions, I'll work on trying to bring that out in the Introduction. I'll
bring out the issues of the maturity of the different proxy disciplines.
Sections 3 and 4 just seem to need some minor wording changes and
some clarification - possibly in a revised introduction. We're hoping that Tim
here will be able to do that. Note that although the reviewer suggested dropping
the forcing section, John Matthews would like that kept.
In conclusion, we are nearly there. CRU will be able to find the colour costs
To those in Trieste - enjoy the week and I hope it will as fruitful as Wengen was.
If anyone is going to be out of contact during the second half of June and early July
can you let me know.
I've reattached the submission as a word file.
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 email@example.com