East Anglia Confirmed Emails from the Climate Research Unit - 1105723247.txt

From: Stefan Rahmstorf <rahmstorf@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: David Rind <drind@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: 6.5.8 revisions
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:20:47 +0100
Cc: Tim Osborn <t.osborn@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Jonathan Overpeck <jto@u.arizona.edu>, Keith Briffa <k.briffa@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Eystein Jansen <eystein.jansen@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, FortunatJoos@xxxxxxxxx.xxx

Hi David,
thanks for the detailed response. I'll try to be brief.
On the orbital forcing you write:

The point here is that climate can be forced by other factors than simply a global,
annual average radiation change, which is the metric now being used.

I think we all agree on this point. My concern is only about how to present it in the
section. I think that giving a climate sensitivity wrt. global mean orbital forcing is
confusing to the uninitiated, e.g. your statement in the section:

This high climate sensitivity (2

Return to the index page | Earlier Emails | Later Emails