From: Caspar Ammann <ammann@ucar.edu>
To: P.Jones@uea.ac.uk
Subject: Re: pdf
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:18:51 -0700

   Phil,

   will do. And regarding TSI, it looks like that 1361 or 1362 (+/-) are going to be the new
   consensus. All I hear is that this seems to be quite robust. Fodder for the critics: all
   these modelers, they always put in too much energy - no wonder it was warming - and now
   they want to reduce the natural component? The SORCE meeting is going to be on that
   satellite stuff but also about climate connections : Sun-Earth. Tom Crowley is going to be
   there, Gavin Schmidt, David Rind, and a few others; of course Judith.

   Thanks for Bo Vinther's manuscript!

   Caspar



   On Jan 30, 2008, at 3:12 PM, [1]P.Jones@uea.ac.uk wrote:

    Caspar,

      OK. Keep me informed. Also I'd like to know more the conclusions

    of the meeting you're going to on the solar constant.

    Just that it can change from 1366.5 to 1361!!

    Cheers

    Phil

   Phil,

   we should hook together on this 1257 event (I call it 1257 because of

   the timings but its just a bit better than an informed guess). We now

   have these simulations of contemporary high-lat eruptions and can

   compare them with low-lat ones.

   Just a couple thoughts

   pro high-lat:

   - climate signal looks better in short and longer term

   - potential for in-ice-core migration of some sulfur species ... some

   new work that has been done ...

   con:

   - deposition duration

   - old fingerprints

   - no high-lat calderas/flows of appropriate size : compare it to

   Eldgja or Laki, this thing is bigger!

   - no large ash layers

   What we need is fingerprinting. I'm participating in a project

   Icelandic volcanism and climate in the last 2000 years. There we have

   money to do some chemical fingerprinting. I'm pursuing to get

   somebody to run these samples. That will be the deciding thing.

   Remember, instrumentation has dramatically increased in sensitivity,

   so I think it should be possible. its not that one would have to go

   dig around too much in the ice cores as the depth/location of that

   monster sulfate spikes are well known.

   Should be interesting.

   Caspar

   On Jan 30, 2008, at 2:57 PM, [2]P.Jones@uea.ac.uk wrote:

    Caspar,

       The meeting I'm at is less interesting than IDAG.

    I'll send the Greenland isotope data when I get back.

      536 is a good story. 1258/9 needs to be good story too...

    I think it isn't at the moment.

    Cheers

    Phil

   Thanks Phil,

   will have a look. I certainly like it, and I only was a bit picky on

   the "largest eruption" versus "largest volcanic signal in trees". I

   like the isotope work very much and will now look if I can pick on

   something more substantial ;-)

   Caspar

   On Jan 30, 2008, at 1:24 PM, [3]P.Jones@uea.ac.uk wrote:

   <2007GL032450.pdf>

   Caspar M. Ammann

   National Center for Atmospheric Research

   Climate and Global Dynamics Division - Paleoclimatology

   1850 Table Mesa Drive

   Boulder, CO 80307-3000

   email: [4]ammann@ucar.edu    tel: 303-497-1705     fax: 303-497-1348

   Caspar M. Ammann

   National Center for Atmospheric Research

   Climate and Global Dynamics Division - Paleoclimatology

   1850 Table Mesa Drive

   Boulder, CO 80307-3000

   email: [5]ammann@ucar.edu    tel: 303-497-1705     fax: 303-497-1348

   Caspar M. Ammann
   National Center for Atmospheric Research
   Climate and Global Dynamics Division - Paleoclimatology
   1850 Table Mesa Drive
   Boulder, CO 80307-3000
   email: [6]ammann@ucar.edu    tel: 303-497-1705     fax: 303-497-1348

References

   1. mailto:P.Jones@uea.ac.uk
   2. mailto:P.Jones@uea.ac.uk
   3. mailto:P.Jones@uea.ac.uk
   4. mailto:ammann@ucar.edu
   5. mailto:ammann@ucar.edu
   6. mailto:ammann@ucar.edu

