cc: k.briffa@uea.ac.uk, Brian Hoskins , jean.jouzel@ipsl.jussieu.fr date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 11:52:09 -0600 from: Susan Solomon subject: Re: FW: IPCC Review Editors report. to: "Mitchell, John FB (Chief Scientist)" , wg1-ar4-re@joss.ucar.edu, rchrist@wmo.int, ipcc-wg1@ucar.edu John I feel that the most appropriate response will be from you, since you have been queried. I will offer the following points that may be useful to you or others in replying to the queries that you or other REs may have received but of course it is up to you how you wish to respond. The IPCC process assesses the published scientific and technical literature or, in some cases 'gray literature', based on the judgment of the authors. In general gray literature is used very seldom in WG1 although such material as industry technical reports are used more frequently in WG3. Unpublished draft papers or technical reports referenced in the chapters are made available to reviewers for the purposes of the review, not the underlying datasets used. IPCC does not have the mandate nor resources to operate as a clearing house for the massive amounts of data used in the underlying papers referenced. The governance of conduct of research, and the governance and requirements of the scientific literature are not IPCC's role. The review editors do not determine the content of the chapters. The authors are responsible for the content of their chapters and responding to comments, not REs. Further explanations, elaboration, or re-interpretations of the comments or the author responses, would not be appropriate. All of the comments, and all of the authors' responses, have been made available. These are the proper source for anyone seeking to understand what comments were made and how the authors dealt with them, and it would be inappropriate to provide more information beyond the reference to the web pages where this can be found. best regards, Susan At 12:23 PM +0000 3/14/08, Mitchell, John FB (Chief Scientist) wrote: Susan I have received the following letter from David Holland, who has links with Stephen McIntyre and his Climate Audint website, on the review process for chapter 6 of AR4 . I have discussed this briefly with Jean and we do not think there is an issue. However, given the wider nature of the questions, I think it would be more appropriate for any response to come through IPCC rather than me as an individual.I will wait to hear from IPCC before I respond. I am in Exeter for the first three days of next week (+44 1392 884604) if you want to discuss this further. I understand Brian has received a similar enquiry, hence I have included his name on the copy list. John Professor John Mitchell OBE FRS Chief Scientist, Met Office FitzRoy Road Exeter EX1 3PB United Kingdom Tel. +44(0)1392884604 Fax:+44 (0) 870 9005050 E-mail: john.f.mitchell@metoffice.gov.uk [1]http://www.metoffice.gov.uk ___________________________________________________________________________________ From: David Holland [mailto:d.holland@tesco.net] Sent: 22 February 2008 15:50 To: Mitchell, John FB (Chief Scientist) Subject: Re: IPCC Review Editors report. Dear Dr Mitchell, Thank you for your reply. In the light of it I hope you might be able to answer the more detailed questions in the attached letter. David Holland ----- Original Message ----- From: [2]Mitchell, John FB (Chief Scientist) To: [3]David Holland Cc: [4]Mitchell, John FB (Chief Scientist) Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 6:34 PM Subject: RE: IPCC Review Editors report. Dear Mr Holland I can confirm that you have had the complete Review Editors report and that there was no supplemental information submitted with the Review Editors report I hope this answers your enquiry. John Mitchell ___________________________________________________________________________________ From: David Holland [mailto:d.holland@tesco.net] Sent: 31 January 2008 18:04 To: Mitchell, John FB (Chief Scientist) Subject: Re: IPCC Review Editors report. Dear Dr Mitchell, WGI TSU have now kindly sent me a copy of your Review Editor's Report and I attach a copy. Clair Hanson from your office, on behalf of WGII TSU has kindly sent me all the WGII reports and many of them provide substantial additional information. Can you confirm that the attached is the complete report or let me have a copy of any supplemental information? Thanking you in advance, David Holland Content-Type: application/pdf; name="CH6RevQs.pdf" Content-Description: CH6RevQs.pdf Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="CH6RevQs.pdf" Attachment converted: Discovery:CH6RevQs.pdf (PDF /«IC») (004B9C39)