date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 16:13:04 +0000 (GMT)
from: Mat Collins <matcollins@meto.gov.uk>
subject: Re: Summary of HC-CRU discussions 29/10/99
to: Tim Osborn <t.osborn@uea.ac.uk>

On Tue, 2 Nov 1999, Tim Osborn wrote:

> We're having e-mail (and other computer-related) problems, so please reply
> if/when you receive this. Thanks.

Got it fine...

> The Hugershoff-standardised reconstructions matched the HadCM3 variability
> reasonably well, in terms of spatial patterns and temporal variability.
> Bigger differences were found when using the age-banded reconstructions,
> which showed greater temporal variability.  It is clearly important to
> identify, if possible, which version is closer to the true level of
> low-frequency climate variability.

It is also important for us to say how much we need to raise the model
control variance to account for natural climate forcings (solar and
volcanoes) in order to perform a strict comparison. We might be able to
get some handle on this from our naturally forced runs but they only go
from 1860-1997.

Cheers, Mat

p.s. Have you got the revised age-banded NH series, or has that been
destroyed in your computer crash?