From: Jonathan Overpeck <jto@u.arizona.

edu>
To: Henry Pollack <hpollack@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: IPCC FAR draft
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:32:11 -0600
Cc: Eystein Jansen <eystein.jansen@geo.uib.no>, Keith Briffa <k.briffa@uea.ac.uk>,
t.osborn@uea.ac.uk

<x-flowed>
Hi Henry - thanks for the email. Just earlier
today, Eystein and I were soliciting approval
from our team on how to best get feedback from
chapter authors - Lead Authors and Contributing
Authors alike. Since we're all authors, it isn't
appropriate to comment officially as expert
reviewers, but rather to work as a team to take
expert reviews - AND chapter 6 author feedback -
and use them to create a better finalo draft. One
key, as promised earlier, is to have a process
that makes sure we get all comments and are able
to respond to them. The other key is that we
ensure time to allow the needed debate. Eystein
and I are going to ask LAs (including Keith) to
do there work sooner in the draft cycle than
before so that we have the time for this.

So... I would suggest you keep these comments in

a safe place for a bit longer, and then send them
in to the Eystein and I when we ask (should be in
the next week). Note that the current draft has
only officially been available for a bit over a
week (indeed, I didn't see it until today since
the IPCC TSU had to check for all sorts of things
after we submitted it over a month ago), and we
won't be working on the new draft until June. So
we have time to be thoughtful and complete in the
feedback gathering process.

Is this ok? Seems more suitable than giving

review via the gov process on your own work (you
are an author of our chapter).

Also, I can anticipate one thing that is going to

come up again, and that I don't think we had your
feedback on (nor Keith's). What about the
borehole recons that you and colleagues have done
extending back beyond the last couple centuries.
I don't have my paper pdf collection here, but I
believe you have some recons going back many
centuries. Does this need more attention in the
chapter?

Thanks for being proactive and quick to send

feedback. We'll be sending our email to all CA's
soon, if you're willing to wait a couple more
days.

Thanks, peck

>Hi Keith (and Peck and Eystein),

>
>I have recently been sent the current draft of the IPCC FAR by the US
>Global Change Research Program, asking for comments on the draft. This
>is the first time I have seen this product since we were feverishly
>exchanging e-mails in February. Let me call to your attention some
>small but not insignificant corrections to be made to the next draft.
>
>Page 6-33, Section 6.6.1.2, line 22. The title of this section (in
>italics) should be changed to "What do ground surface temperature
>reconstructions derived from subsurface temperature measurements tell
>us?"
>
>Page 6-33, lines 49 and 52, there is a reference (Smerdon et al., in press).
>This paper has now been published, so substitute "2006" for "in press",
>and in the list of references the citation should include the following:
>
>J. Geophys. Res. 111, D07101, doi:10.1029/2004JD005578
>
>Page 6-34, lines 43 and 44. This section is dealing with the southern
>hemisphere. The sentence "...these both indicate unusually warm
>conditions prevailing in the 20th century (Pollack and Smerdon, 2004)"
>, and the reference therein, are both incorrect.
>
>The ground surface temperature changes over the last 500 years DO NOT
>indicate unusually warm conditions prevailing in the 20th century in
>Australia and southern Africa. This is because the unusually warm
>conditions developed late in the century, after most of the boreholes
>had already been logged. What the borehole reconstruction for
>Australia does show is very good correspondence with the Cook et al
>(2000) reconstruction for Tasmania and the Cook et al. (2002) recon for
>New Zealand. The Australia work is described in a manuscript �Five
>centuries of Climate Change in Australia: The View from Underground� by
>Pollack, Huang and Smerdon now under review in the Journal of
>Quaternary Science. The Africa work is unpublished.
>
>Is this e-mail to you sufficient to activate these changes? Or should I
>submit these comments to the US Government Review Panel? If I am to
>submit to the latter, they require all comments to be filed by May 9.
>
>Cheers,
>Henry
>
>
> ___ ___ Henry N. Pollack
>[ \ / ] Professor of Geophysics
> | \/ | Department of Geological Sciences
> |MICHIGAN| University of Michigan
>[___]\/[___] Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1005, U.S.A.
>
> Phone: 734-763-0084 FAX: 734-763-4690
> e-mail: hpollack@umich.edu
> URL: www.geo.lsa.umich.edu/~hpollack/
> URL: www-personal.umich.edu/~hpollack/book.html

--
Jonathan T. Overpeck
Director, Institute for the Study of Planet Earth
Professor, Department of Geosciences
Professor, Department of Atmospheric Sciences

Mail and Fedex Address:

Institute for the Study of Planet Earth

715 N. Park Ave. 2nd Floor
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
direct tel: +1 520 622-9065
fax: +1 520 792-8795
http://www.geo.arizona.edu/
http://www.ispe.arizona.edu/
</x-flowed>