date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:24:31 -0700
from: Tom Wigley <wigley@cgd.ucar.edu>
subject: MAGICC stuff
to: Sarah Raper <sraper@awi-bremerhaven.de>, Sarah Raper <s.raper@uea.ac.uk>

Dear Sarah,

Rachel continues to amaze me by her ignorance.

Still, it *would* be nice to add some more models to the set that
you have calibrated against MAGICC -- independent of Rachel's
request.  I presume that one could do this for any models that are
in the CMIP data base -- ??.

As you know, I will be going to the meeting in Oxford on April
15,16. I was planning to come over earlier, probably before
Easter. There are various things I want to do/ people to see.
Perhaps I could come up to Norwich around April 7,8? There
are a few things that we could sort out much more easily if we
were together. For instance, I still don't understand what your
concerns are about the effective climate sensitivity as backed out
of MAGICC -- but I am sure you can enlighten me quickly face to
face.

At the same time, we could calibrate a few more AOGCMs,
since these issues must be closely related.  If this were a possibility
then do we need to get more numbers from CMIP?

The other thing I am playing around with is estimating a pdf for
sensitivity from observed temperature, using MAGICC. I have
devised two different ways to do this that I think are more transparent
than what others have done, and which circumvent what I see as
defects in previous analyses. I should have got far enough with this
by April for us to be able to look at it together.

This leads on to the IPCC sensitivity meeting. The dates are July
26 -- 29. I have hard copy of the program. The participants
(speakers) include you on the first day on "Climate sensitivity as a
function of time".  Neither I nor Ben have been invited. I am a bit
disappointed by this, since I have done a lot of work on the subject
over the years. However, I haven't published much on this recently.
On the other hand, late July is a difficult time for me to travel. The
fact that I am not going and that you apparently are is part of my
reason for wanting to get together in April.

For calculating lambdas, this is dim in my mind too. The LAMCALC
subroutine was written in 1995. The issue of negative lambdas came
up more recently and I put a flag in to warn users if a negative value
occurred -- with a suggestion to change XKLO. It is interesting that
Boer gets negative lambdas -- I will have to check this out. The
subroutine calculates equilibrium temperatures over the four boxes,
but I don't think I ever looked at these. Might be interesting.

It is good that Jean has the TSU job -- can't think of anyone better
for such a job. Also, good that Tim Lenton has a job at UEA. If he
were there before Easter I would very much like to talk to him. Do
you know when he is coming to UEA?

Let me know about pre-Easter.

All the best,
Tom.

