date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:02:44 -0600 from: "Gilbert Compo" subject: Re: Twentieth Century Reanalysis preliminary version 2 data to: Phil Jones On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:12:04 +0000, Phil Jones wrote > Gil, > Sounds good re reliability. > > On the USHCN adjustments it is important to > distinguish the TOB (Time of Observation Bias) > adjustments from the homogeneity adjustments. TOB > causes most of the differences, but TOB is unique > to the US. Elsewhere there has never been this > switch from afternoon to morning reading of Tx > and Tn. The rest of the world has always done things in the morning. Good point. > > In the BAMS paper I sent there is a figure on the effect of TOB. thanks! I haven't had a chance to look at that yet. Oh, the picture I sent has an error in the models. The wrong east-west domain was used for the CMIP3 models. I am generating a correction. This will effect dtrended results in particular. Ah, research. best wishes, gil > > Cheers > Phil > > At 19:08 11/11/2009, you wrote: > > >Phil, > > > >I'm on vacation today. I'll get back to you with more thoughts. Thanks for > >these ideas. One thing that I was thinking is that the Menne et al (Menne > >and Vose?) USHCN adjustments altered the sign of the US trend in Tmax and > >Tmin in some regions. I have no idea what that does to individual year large > >area averages. > > > >In the QJ paper my goal is going to be to put some statements about how > >reliable we think that the various variables are and during which periods. > > > >thanks, > >gil > > > >On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:20:21 +0000, Phil Jones wrote > > > Gil, > > > A few thoughts. I looked at the uncertainty > > > of the ensemble filter for some dates in the > > > 1920s and 1930s, and also the 1910s. The less > > > certain blue areas seem like the Arctic High > > > problem from one of my papers long long ago. The > > > region affected in blue (larger in winter and > > > less in summer) is the Canadian archipelago, the > > > north of Greenland and the Beaufort Sea. > > > There doesn't appear to be any observational > > > dots in this region. One way of checking the > > > temperatures reproduced here would be to look at > > > this paper by Vinther et al (2006) - also attached. > > > http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/greenland/ > > > If you go here you can download the long > > > temperature series for 3 sites. The most northern > > > one is Illulisat - previously known as > > > Jakobshavn. I've also attached Upernivik which > > > is 72N on West Greenland. Probably worth > > > comparing 20CRv2 with these two series. > > > These NW Greenland series are the longest > > > series I'm aware of in this data sparse region. > > > It seems as if any MSLP data these W Greenland sites recorded hasn't > > > gone in? > > > > > > Another thought is to block out this area > > > when calculating large scale averages. You are > > > sort of doing this by only going to 70N in your zonal bands. > > > > > > As for getting temperature series > > > pre-homogenization/pre-adjustment this isn't > > > going to make any difference. The number of > > > series adjusted is fairly small and adjustment > > > depends on a reasonable network as well. The > > > skeptics are after us to do this, but it is going > > > to be a lot of work for no reward, as it makes no > > > difference to large-scale averages! Look at > > > Figure 6 and the inset numbers, which show the > > > effect of homogeneity adjustments for the > > > contiguous US - see Menne et al attached. There > > > is a similar plot in Brohan et al (2006) for the > > > rest of the world - including Canadian > > > adjustments. We're using Lucie Vincent's adjusted > > > series for the whole of Canada. > > > > > > I agree that the 1955-65 should be as good as the 1990s. > > > > > > Cheers > > > Phil > > > > > > At 20:46 10/11/2009, you wrote: > > > >Phil Jones wrote on 11/10/09 5:35 AM: > > > >> > > > >> Gil, > > > >> These will do for my purpose. I won't pass > > > >> them on. I am looking forward to the draft > > > >> paper. As you're fully aware you're going to > > > >> have to go some ways to figuring out what's causing the differences. > > > >> You will have to go down the sub-sampling, > > > >> but I don't think it is going to make much > > > >> difference. The agreement between CRU and GISS > > > >> is amazing good, as already know. You ought to > > > >> include the NCDC dataset as well. > > > >> > > > >>http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/anomalies/index.html > > > >>the ERSST3b dataset. > > > >We will put the NOAA ERSST3b in, too. I left it off the plot for > >simplicity. > > > >> > > > >> In the lower two plots there appear to be > > > >> two types of differences, clearer in the NH20-70 land domain. > > > >> The first is when reanl20v2 differs for a > > > >> single year (like a year in the last 1960s, > > > >> 1967 or 1968) and then when it differs for > > > >> about 10 years or so. It is good that it keeps > > > >> coming back. For individual years there are a > > > >> couple of years in the first decade of the 20th century (the 1900s). > > > >Is there a way to get back to the original > > > >series (pre-homogenization and adjustments) that > > > >are used in the gridbox averages? > > > >> > > > >> The longer periods are those you've noticed > > > >> - the 1920s and the 1890s. There is also > > > >> something up with the period 1955-65 and the > > > >> 1970s. The 1920s seems to get back then go off > > > >> again from about 1935 to early 1940s. Best > > > >> thing to try and isolate some of the reasons > > > >> would be maps for decades or individual years. > > > >> For the 1920s I'd expect the differences to be > > > >> coming from Siberia as opposed to Canada. I > > > >> think the 1890s might be just down to sparser > > > >> coverage. The 1890s is the only period where > > > >> the difference brings your pink line back > > > >> towards the long-term zero. All the others > > > >> have the pink line more extreme than the HadCRUT3/GISS average. > > > >I think that the 1955-65 is going to turn out to > > > >be very reliable. There is no a priori reason > > > >why 1990-2000 should be "better" than that > > > >period. In the 1970's the ships turn out to have > > > >larger error than we specified, although that > > > >should not affect the land temperatures very much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> Rob Allan just called. I briefly mentioned > > > >> this to him. He suggested maps of data input > > > >> during these times. He also suggested looking > > > >> at the spread of the ensembles. Your grey > > > >> spread is sort of this, but this is a > > > >> different sort of ensemble to what Rob implied you might have? > > > >The maps of the data input aren't that helpful > > > >because the dynamics distributes the > > > >information. What is helpful is the reanalysis ensemble spread. > > > >This is not the same as the grey shading. The > > > >ensemble filter produces its own estimate of > > > >uncertainty for every variable at every time. We > > > >have 56 equally-like maps for every variable for > > > >every time. For SLP and 500 mb height, see the coloring in the maps at > > > > > >http://www.esr > >l.noaa.gov/psd/data/20thC_Rean/hem_images.html > > > >blue is less certain, white is more certain. > > > > > > > >The grey shading is the 90% range of the 25 > > > >CMIP3 model integrations I am using (only 25 > > > >runs can be cleanly extended including volcanic, solar, and aerosol > >forcing). > > > > > > > >I need to calculate the reanalysis uncertainty > > > >for annual and area averages. For that, I need > > > >to recover the every-member files, which I am > > > >now offloading from the mass store - this will > > > >take a Long Time. I can use the individual > > > >6-hourly uncertainty fields, but it isn't > > > >exactly the same because of correlations in the > > > >uncertainty co-variance matrix. > > > > > > > >I hoping for a draft sooner. Keep your fingers crossed! > > > > > > > >best wishes, > > > >gil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> One final thing - don't worry too much about > > > >> the 1940-60 period, as I think we'll be > > > >> changing the SSTs there for 1945-60 and with > > > >> more digitized data for 1940-45. There is also > > > >> a tendency for the last 10 years (1996-2005) > > > >> to drift slightly low - all 3 lines. This may be down to SST issues. > > > >> > > > >> Once again thanks for these! Hoping you'll > > > >> send me a Christmas Present of the draft! > > > >> > > > >> Cheers > > > >> Phil > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>At 20:45 09/11/2009, you wrote: > > > >>>Phil, > > > >>> > > > >>>1. I didn't get the attached. > > > >>>Both version1 and version2 use HadISST1.1 for SST and sea ice. > > > >>> > > > >>>2. time-varying CO2, volcanic aerosols, and > > > >>>solar variability (11-year cycle until 1949, > > > >>>"observed" after that) are specified. > > > >>> > > > >>>Attached is a research figure. Please do not share. > > > >>> > > > >>>In it, I have plotted the annual average (top > > > >>>panel) 50S to 70N global average 2m > > > >>>temperature from 20CRv2, SST/2m temperature > > > >>>from HadCRU3, SST/2m temperature from GISTEMP > > > >>>1200km, and the 90% range of 2m air > > > >>>temperature from 25 CMIP3 models that can be > > > >>>extended beyond their 20C3M runs with SRESA1B. > > > >>>The ensemble mean is the thick gray curve. Averages are July-June. > > > >>> > > > >>>(middle panel) 50S to 70N land-only 2m > > > >>>temperature from 20CRv2, 2m temperature from > > > >>>CRUTEM3, 2m temperature from GISTEMP land-only 1200km. CMIP3 data is > >the same. > > > >>> > > > >>>(bottom panel) same as middle panel but for > > > >>>Northern Hemisphere land-only (20N to 70N). > > > >>> > > > >>>Anomalies are with respect to 1901-2000. > > > >>>period is July 1891 to June 2005. The CRU > > > >>>(HadCRU) curves are supposed to be black. > > > >>> > > > >>>No data has been masked by another dataset's > > > >>>observational availability, but missing values > > > >>>are not included in that dataset's area-weighted average. > > > >>> > > > >>>Your ERA-Interim finding about it being warmer > > > >>>seems to be the case in the late 19th century but not the early 1920's. > > > >>> > > > >>>Note that the only thermometer data in the > > > >>>magenta curve (20CRv2) is the HadISST1.1 over > > > >>>oceans. The two landonly panels are > > > >>>independent of thermometers, aside from the specified SSTs. > > > >>> > > > >>>There are some very interesting differences, > > > >>>particulary late-19th century, 1920s, and WWII. > > > >>> > > > >>>Correlations (I told you this was research, > > > >>>right?). The second pair is for linearly detrended data. > > > >>> > > > >>>GLOBE (70N-50S) > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.70n50s.landocean.juljun > > > >>>hadcru3.70n50s.landocean.juljun 0.94370 > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.70n50s.landocean.juljun > > > >>>hadcru3.70n50s.landocean.juljun 0.82017 > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.70n50s.landocean.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_combined1200.70n50s.landocean.juljun 0.95284 > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.70n50s.landocean.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_combined1200.70n50s.landocean.juljun 0.85808 > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>hadcru3.70n50s.landocean.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_combined1200.70n50s.landocean.juljun 0.99088 > > > >>> > > > >>>hadcru3.70n50s.landocean.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_combined1200.70n50s.landocean.juljun 0.97383 > > > >>> > > > >>>GLOBAL LAND (70N-50S) > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.70n50s.landonly.juljun > > > >>>cru3.70n50s.landonly.juljun 0.85167 > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.70n50s.landonly.juljun > > > >>>cru3.70n50s.landonly.juljun 0.68755 > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.70n50s.landonly.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_land1200.70n50s.landonly.juljun 0.81469 > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.70n50s.landonly.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_land1200.70n50s.landonly.juljun 0.60152 > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>cru3.70n50s.landonly.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_land1200.70n50s.landonly.juljun 0.98050 > > > >>> > > > >>>cru3.70n50s.landonly.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_land1200.70n50s.landonly.juljun 0.95316 > > > >>> > > > >>>NH Land (20N-70N) > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun > > > >>>cru3.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun 0.82956 > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun > > > >>>cru3.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun 0.67989 > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_land1200.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun 0.79247 > > > >>> > > > >>>reanl20v2.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_land1200.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun 0.59900 > > > >>> > > > >>>cru3.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_land1200.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun 0.98001 > > > >>> > > > >>>cru3.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun > > > >>>gistemp_land1200.nh_nohigh.landonly.juljun 0.95880 > > > >>> > > > >>>I thought that correlations of 0.8 to 0.85 > > > >>>were high for an independent dataset this > > > >>>long. I think that these are higher than the proxies? > > > >>>The global isn't that fair because we have the HadISST. > > > >>> > > > >>>The correlations are about the same as for AMIP runs, though. See > > > >>>Hoerling M., A. Kumar, J. Eischeid, B. Jha > > > >>>(2008), What is causing the variability in > > > >>>global mean land temperature?, Geophys. Res. > > > >>>Lett., 35, L23712, doi:10.1029/2008GL035984. > > > >>> > > > >>>It will be interesting to see if the masked numbers change. > > > >>> > > > >>>Let me know if you need anything else on this for your essay material. > > > >>> > > > >>>best wishes, > > > >>> > > > >>>gil > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>Phil Jones wrote on 11/9/09 2:55 AM: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Gil, > > > >>>> A couple of questions. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> 1. See the attached. Is this paper providing the SST input to 20CRv2? > > > >>>> 2. Do you change greenhouse gases in the run? > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Apologies if these are answered elsewhere. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Do you have any pre-draft plots without > > > >>>> subsampling to get some idea of how good the agreement? > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I'm asking these questions as I'm writing > > > >>>> an essay for Climate Change. There are no > > > >>>> diagrams in this, but showing the agreement > > > >>>> with 20CRv2 will be a nice way to finish the paper. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Paper briefly documents the magnitude of > > > >>>> all the problems in global temperature data > > > >>>> - such as SST biases, exposure issues, > > > >>>> urbanization and site changes (in order of > > > >>>> importance). Site changes for global > > > >>>> averages are the least important. Trying to > > > >>>> point to a few home truths to skeptics who > > > >>>> keep on going on about the land data. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Cheers > > > >>>> Phil > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>>At 15:39 03/11/2009, Gil Compo wrote: > > > >>>>>Phil, > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>Already calculated. We don't suffer from > > > >>>>>some of the issues that you and Adrian > > > >>>>>raised because we use only surface pressure. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>In the Northern Hemisphere extratropics, the > > > >>>>>agreement with the various (yours, GISTEMP, > > > >>>>>NOAA) thermometer-based near surface T is > > > >>>>>high, but in the Tropics and Southern > > > >>>>>Hemisphere, there are discrepancies, > > > >>>>>particularly over Africa and South > > > >>>>>America. The 20CRv2 does not have the intensity of the Siberia > >warming. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>There are also discrepancies in the WWII > > > >>>>>period. I have not subset the reanalysis to > > > >>>>>correspond to a particular dataset's missing > > > >>>>>mask as all 3 have different coverages. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>I'll be making plots for the paper (with a draft coming) soon. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>best wishes, > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>gil > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>P.Jones@uea.ac.uk wrote on 11/3/09 3:37 AM: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Gil, > > > >>>>>> I'm sitting in a meeting in Bristol with Rob Allan. We've > > > >>>>>>had a > > > >>>>>>thought. When you finish v2 will you be quickly calculating the > >global > > > >>>>>>T average for the 1891-2006 period? Do you expect this to look like > >the > > > >>>>>>real global T, or do you expect it to not show the longer timescale > > > >>>>>>change that NCEP from 1948 showed? > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> I can send a paper with Adrian Simmons from JGR in 2004 on > > > >>>>>>this when > > > >>>>>>I'm back in Norwich tomorrow. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Cheers > > > >>>>>> Phil > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>Dear Colleagues, > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>Courtesy of the NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory Physical > >Sciences > > > >>>>>>>Division and University of Colorado CIRES Climate Diagnostics > >Center, at > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>ftp://ftp.cdc.noaa.gov/Datasets/20thC_Rean/provisionalV2/ , > > > >>>>>>>please find temporary netCDF files from the 20th Century Reanalysis > > > >>>>>>>version 2 (1891-2006). These yearly files are for the ensemble mean > > > >>>>>>>analysis (means) and ensemble standard deviation (spreads) of > >selected > > > >>>>>>>variables. Colleagues from organizations contributing to the 20th > > > >>>>>>>Century Reanalysis version 2 or the International Surface Pressure > > > >>>>>>>Databank version2.2, the observational input dataset, are welcome to > > > >>>>>>>investigate these preliminary files. Colleagues on the Atmospheric > > > >>>>>>>Circulation Reconstructions over the Earth Working Group 3 ­ > > > >>>>>>>Verification and Validation of reanalyses are also welcome to begin > > > >>>>>>>working with these files. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>We are working with our distribution partners at the National > >Center for > > > >>>>>>>Atmospheric Research, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric > > > >>>>>>>Administration (NOAA) Earth System Research Laboratory and NOAA’s > > > >>>>>>>National Climatic Data Center on wider availability and > >documentation. > > > >>>>>>>A rough draft of important documentation is attached. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>Also, please see our new homepage at > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/20thC_Rean/ which includes access > > > >>>>>>>to > > > >>>>>>>images of 6-hourly sea level pressure and 500 geopotential maps > > > >>>>>>>generated from the version 2 data. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>When production is complete, the 20CR version 2 will span 1871 to > > > >>>>>>>present. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>The references for the dataset are > > > >>>>>>>• Compo, G.P., J.S. Whitaker, P.D. Sardeshmukh, N. Matsui, R.J. > >Allan, > > > >>>>>>>X. Yin,B.E. Gleason, R.S. Vose, G. Rutledge, P. Bessemoulin, S. > > > >>>>>>>Brönnimann, M. Brunet, R.I. Crouthamel, A.N. Grant, P.Y. Groisman, > >P.D. > > > >>>>>>>Jones, M. Kruk, A.C. Kruger, G.J. Marshall, M. Maugeri, H.Y. Mok, Ø. > > > >>>>>>>Nordli, T.F. Ross, R.M. Trigo, X.L. Wang, S.D. Woodruff, S.J. > >Worley, > > > >>>>>>>2009: The Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project. Quarterly J. Roy. > >Met. > > > >>>>>>>Soc., in preparation. > > > >>>>>>>• Compo, G.P., J.S. Whitaker, P.D. Sardeshmukh, 2008: The 20th > >Century > > > >>>>>>>Reanalysis Project. Third WCRP International Conference on > >Reanalysis, > > > >>>>>>>28 January 2008, Tokyo, Japan > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>< > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>http://wcrp.ipsl.jussieu.fr/Workshops/Reanalysis2008/Documents/V5- > >511_ea.pdf > > > >>>>>>> >. > > > >>>>>>>• Compo,G.P., J.S. Whitaker, and P.D. Sardeshmukh, 2006: > >Feasibility of > > > >>>>>>>a 100 year reanalysis using only surface pressure data. Bull. Amer. > >Met. > > > >>>>>>>Soc., 87, 175-190. > > > >>>>>>>• Whitaker, J.S., G.P.Compo, X. Wei, and T.M. Hamill 2004: > >Reanalysis > > > >>>>>>>without radiosondes using ensemble data assimilation. Mon. Wea. > >Rev., > > > >>>>>>>132, 1190-1200. > > > >>>>>>>Please let us know of any questions about the dataset. And, thank > >you > > > >>>>>>>for your contributions to its development. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>Best wishes, > > > >>>>>>>Gil Compo > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>Jeffrey S. Whitaker > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>20th Century Reanalysis Project leads > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>-- > > > >>>>>>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > >>>>>>>Gil Compo, Research Scientist, CIRES > > > >>>>>>>University of Colorado > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>Mail : CIRES Climate Diagnostics Center > > > >>>>>>>NOAA Physical Sciences Division > > > >>>>>>>Earth System Research Laboratory > > > >>>>>>>325 Broadway R/PSD1, Boulder, CO 80305-3328 > > > >>>>>>>Email: compo@colorado.edu > > > >>>>>>>Phone: (303) 497-6115 Fax: (303) 497-6449 > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/people/gilbert.p.compo > > > >>>>>>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > >>>>>>>"Stop and consider the wondrous works of God." > > > >>>>>>> Job 37:34 > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>-- > > > >>>>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > >>>>>Gil Compo, Research Scientist, CIRES > > > >>>>>University of Colorado > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>Mail : CIRES Climate Diagnostics Center > > > >>>>>NOAA Physical Sciences Division > > > >>>>>Earth System Research Laboratory > > > >>>>>325 Broadway R/PSD1, Boulder, CO 80305-3328 > > > >>>>>Email: compo@colorado.edu > > > >>>>>Phone: (303) 497-6115 Fax: (303) 497-6449 > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/people/gilbert.p.compo > > > >>>>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > >>>>>"Stop and consider the wondrous works of God." > > > >>>>> Job 37:34 > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>>Prof. Phil Jones > > > >>>>Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 > > > >>>>School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 > > > >>>>University of East Anglia > > > >>>>Norwich Email > > > >>>>p.jones@uea.ac.uk > > > >>>>NR4 7TJ > > > >>>>UK > > > >>>>------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > >----- > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>-- > > > >>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > >>>Gil Compo, Research Scientist, CIRES > > > >>>University of Colorado > > > >>> > > > >>>Mail : CIRES Climate Diagnostics Center > > > >>>NOAA Physical Sciences Division > > > >>>Earth System Research Laboratory > > > >>>325 Broadway R/PSD1, Boulder, CO 80305-3328 > > > >>>Email: compo@colorado.edu > > > >>>Phone: (303) 497-6115 Fax: (303) 497-6449 > > > >>> > > > >>>http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/people/gilbert.p.compo > > > >>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > >>>"Stop and consider the wondrous works of God." > > > >>> Job 37:34 > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >>Prof. Phil Jones > > > >>Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 > > > >>School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 > > > >>University of East Anglia > > > >>Norwich Email > > > >>p.jones@uea.ac.uk > > > >>NR4 7TJ > > > >>UK > > > >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > >--- > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > > >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > >Gil Compo, Research Scientist, CIRES > > > >University of Colorado > > > > > > > >Mail : CIRES Climate Diagnostics Center > > > >NOAA Physical Sciences Division > > > >Earth System Research Laboratory > > > >325 Broadway R/PSD1, Boulder, CO 80305-3328 > > > >Email: compo@colorado.edu > > > >Phone: (303) 497-6115 Fax: (303) 497-6449 > > > > > >http://www.esrl.noaa.go > >v/psd/people/gilbert.p.compo > > > >+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > >"Stop and consider the wondrous works of God." > > > > Job 37:34 > > > > > > Prof. Phil Jones > > > Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 > > > School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 > > > University of East Anglia > > > Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk > > > NR4 7TJ > > > UK > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > >- > > > > > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >Gil Compo, Research Scientist, CIRES > >University of Colorado > > > >Mail :CIRES Climate Diagnostics Center > >NOAA ESRL > >325 Broadway R/PSD1, Boulder, CO 80305-3328 > >Email: compo@colorado.edu > >Phone: (303) 497-6115 Fax: (303) 497-6449 > >http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/people/gilbert.p.compo > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >"Do you know the balancings of the clouds, > >the wondrous works of Him who is perfect > >in knowledge?" Job 37:16 > > Prof. Phil Jones > Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 > School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 > University of East Anglia > Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk > NR4 7TJ > UK > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Gil Compo, Research Scientist, CIRES University of Colorado Mail :CIRES Climate Diagnostics Center NOAA ESRL 325 Broadway R/PSD1, Boulder, CO 80305-3328 Email: compo@colorado.edu Phone: (303) 497-6115 Fax: (303) 497-6449 http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/people/gilbert.p.compo ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "Do you know the balancings of the clouds, the wondrous works of Him who is perfect in knowledge?" Job 37:16