From: Jonathan Overpeck <jto@u.arizona.edu>
To: Fortunat Joos <joos@climate.unibe.ch>
Subject: Re: new fig 6.14
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 10:22:26 -0600
Cc: t.osborn@uea.ac.uk, Keith Briffa <k.briffa@uea.ac.uk>, Eystein Jansen <eystein.jansen@geo.uib.no>

<x-flowed>
Hi all - Thanks for all the Euro-dialog before I even got to my 
computer - lots of good issues raised, and glad the misunderstanding 
got cleared up.

Eystein and I can't connect easily today, so I'm going to take a stab 
at the CLA compromise, guessing that he'll concur. If not, he can 
clarify.

1) We really do need to see the original forcing (spikes for volc, 
higher freq for solar), so that should be a given. If Tim can do his 
usual graphical magic and get a smoothed version in there too, that's 
ok, but I think Fortunat is correct that this new 6.14 gives us a 
chance to show data differently (and in a way that the TS team really 
would like). BUT, to show a smoothed curve, perhaps behind? (or 
whatever looks best and makes it easy to see the more raw data) the 
more raw data, would be a nice way to connect 6.14 with 6.13, and 
also make the points that Tim points out - especially highlighting 
the obvious link between forcing and response prior to 1900. This 
last point is key for the TS too. BUT, please don't make the more raw 
data hard to see - they are a KEY part of this fig, especially in the 
TS. So... go for it Tim - I suggest some annotation for those peaks 
that are too large to plot - perhaps an asterisk with a note in the 
caption that "*volcanic forcing peaks larger than XXX are truncated 
for plotting purposes" or something like that.

2) the nomalisation reference period should be consistent between all 
of the associated figs, so I'd stick with with you've been doing Tim. 
Otherwise, it will be too confusing.

3) as to whether forcing should be proportional. As long as the 
scaling (y-axis labeling) is explicit we can be flexible here in 
order to make sure viewers can see all of the smoothed and unsmoothed 
forcing data clearly. That is the key, and we can relax the need to 
have them all proportional in this fig.

Bottom line is that the forcing data we present should have the 
ability to see the differences in solar clearly - as Fortunat's 
mock-up plot does. This is driven more from the TS, but that's ok - 
we get serious play in the TS.

Hope this provides enough for Tim to go with, and as always, if you 
want to provide some options, that's fine.

Fortunat - you'll need write the caption - hopefully keeping it as 
brief as possible by citing the earlier captions in the report.

thanks all! best, Peck
-- 
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>

