cc: wg1-ar4-ch06@joss.ucar.edu date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:22:47 +0200 from: Stefan Rahmstorf subject: Re: [Wg1-ar4-ch06] Comments on Section 6.3 to: David Rind Dear David, not sure this is a helpful discussion to get the AR4 on track... So convection is not a "zeroth and first order processes that dominate the problem", when GCMs look at ocean circulation changes? As an oceanographer, I would argue that it is, and it is parameterised in any coupled climate model I know of, not calculated from first-order principles. I suspect the same is true for clouds in GCMs. Our model certainly parameterises more processes than a GCM - there is indeed a price to pay for speed. But that remains a difference of degree, not a fundamental one. Note also that the parameterisations we use mostly have a sound theoretical basis, they are not some arbitrary tunable things. It is not a scientific argument to refer me to other people who may have a bad opinion of the model (the reviewers of our 50+ papers obviously didn't), nor is it a scientific argument to compare me with climate sceptics. That does not help our working atmosphere. I suggest we close this discussion and simply agree that we disagree on this point; the topic of EMICS is covered well in other chapters, and there is no need to go deeply into this in our chapter. Stefan -- To reach me directly please use: rahmstorf@ozean-klima.de (My former addresses @pik-potsdam.de are read by my assistant Brigitta.) Stefan Rahmstorf www.ozean-klima.de www.realclimate.org _______________________________________________ Wg1-ar4-ch06 mailing list Wg1-ar4-ch06@joss.ucar.edu http://www.joss.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/wg1-ar4-ch06