cc: Orson van de Plassche , Jonathan Gregory , "Tett, Simon" , "Lowe, Jason" , Keith Briffa date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:14:59 +0100 from: Tim Osborn subject: Re: Attaching All250 to Nat500 runs to: Alex Wright At 13:45 05/07/2006, Alex Wright wrote: >Its great that the results are really being discussed now, but I am >going to 'pause' with any further 'figures/comparisons until a >'consensus' is reached on the issues Tim/Simon have brought up with >regards to model output. Simon... any disagreement/suggestions for improvement with how I extracted the sea level data? > > Yes you can clearly see the difference between Nat500 and All250 > MOC, though my question remains, what is it specifically about the > All250 forcings that produces this response? I'm not sure that it is a forced response. It might just be internal variability that could have happened at any time or in either run, but just happened to occur in the all250 run. Simon discusses this issue on page 12 of the paper (not the sea level paper, but the one titled "The impact of Natural and Anthropogenic Forcings on Climate and Hydrology since 1550." See top right section. The size of this MOC change is near the limit of what might be expected by internal variability, and it is unclear whether forcings were important or not. Possibly they were, but I'm not sure which ones! Cheers Tim Dr Timothy J Osborn, Academic Fellow Climatic Research Unit School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK e-mail: t.osborn@uea.ac.uk phone: +44 1603 592089 fax: +44 1603 507784 web: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/ sunclock: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/sunclock.htm **Norwich -- City for Science: **Hosting the BA Festival 2-9 September 2006