date: Tue Nov 23 15:35:22 2004
from: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>
subject: RE: FWD: Weather and climate/ TYNDALL SEMINAR
to: f034 <C.Goodess@uea.ac.uk>, <c.goodess@uea.ac.uk>, Craig Wallace <craig.wallace@uea.ac.uk>, Marie Ekstrom <m.ekstrom@uea.ac.uk>

    Agreed. This would be one to avoid.
    Phil
   At 14:56 23/11/2004, f034 wrote:

     Phil, Marie, Craig
     If this seminar turns into an arguement between Alan and John along the lines
     of this correspondence, then I don't think CRU would want to be
     involved/responsible!
     Clare
     >===== Original Message From "Laura Middleton" <Laura.Middleton@uea.ac.uk>
     =====
     >Dear Clare, Craig and Marie,
     >I thought this might be good as a joint tyndall CRU seminar, or maybe I've
     >got it horribly wrong! Provisional dates feb/march.
     >Let me know. Laura
     >
     >-----Original Message-----
     >From: John Schellnhuber [[1]mailto:H.J.Schellnhuber@uea.ac.uk]
     >Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 11:12
     >To: A.J.Thorpe
     >Cc: John Schellnhuber; Laura Middleton
     >Subject: Re: Weather and climate/ TYNDALL SEMINAR
     >Importance: High
     >
     >Excellent! I will copy this to Laura, who is organizing the Tyndall Seminar
     >and who will try to find a convenient date in February or March.
     >
     >I am looking forward to a very interesting discussion!
     >
     >Regards,
     >John
     >
     >
     >----- Original Message -----
     >From: "A.J.Thorpe" <a.j.thorpe@reading.ac.uk>
     >To: "John Schellnhuber" <H.J.Schellnhuber@uea.ac.uk>
     >Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 10:51 AM
     >Subject: Re: Weather and climate
     >
     >
     >> John,
     >>
     >>     I would be very happy to come to Tyndall to give a seminar with a
     >title
     >> something like "Putting weather into climate: a WWRP perspective on
     >climate
     >> change prediction". WWRP = World Weather Research Programme. I guess we
     >may
     >> be looking at February for a possible time slot?
     >>
     >>     Uncertainties will never be zero - all we can do is properly quantify
     >> them with the same scientific rigour that we apply to the prediction
     >itself.
     >> I don't accept the association between GCMs and low, or no, uncertainty.
     >No
     >> prediction should come without a scientifically-defined and rigorous
     >> uncertainty estimate.
     >>
     >>                      Alan
     >>
     >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
     >> Professor Alan J. Thorpe
     >> Director, NERC Centres for Atmospheric Science
     >> Dept of Meteorology, University of Reading,
     >> Earley Gate, PO Box 243, Reading RG6 6BB
     >>
     >> Tel: + 44 (0) 118 378 6979/6452
     >> Fax: + 44 (0) 118 378 6462
     >> Mobile: 0774 771 5842
     >> Email: A.J.Thorpe@reading.ac.uk
     >> Web: [2]http://ncas.nerc.ac.uk
     >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
     >>
     >> ----- Original Message -----
     >> From: "John Schellnhuber" <H.J.Schellnhuber@uea.ac.uk>
     >> To: "Alan Thorpe" <a.j.thorpe@reading.ac.uk>
     >> Cc: "John Schellnhuber" <H.J.Schellnhuber@uea.ac.uk>
     >> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 10:08 AM
     >> Subject: Re: Weather and climate
     >>
     >>
     >> > Dear Alan,
     >> >
     >> > Interesting debate - I wonder whether we should pursue it in a more
     >> > organized way: would you be willing to come for a Tyndall seminar in due
     >> > course to present your ideas? This could have a significant impact on
     >our
     >> > Phase II strategy. And it would be fun, anyway, to discuss these subtle
     >> > issues with you.
     >> >
     >> > Just one remark on your note: Hadley is number one - in the GCM field -
     >> but
     >> > is this the most important field for climate change management? You
     >cannot
     >> > wait for starting climate protection policy until all uncertainties have
     >> > been removed. So it boils done again to what we mean by precaution.
     >> >
     >> > Would be nice to see you soon for further exchange of arguments.
     >> >
     >> > Regards,
     >> > John
     >> >
     >> >
     >> >
     >> > ----- Original Message -----
     >> > From: "Alan Thorpe" <a.j.thorpe@reading.ac.uk>
     >> > To: "John Schellnhuber" <H.J.Schellnhuber@uea.ac.uk>
     >> > Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 8:00 PM
     >> > Subject: Re: Weather and climate
     >> >
     >> >
     >> > > John,
     >> > >
     >> > >     Thanks for this - I wonder if you should contact the BBC and THES
     >as
     >> > > they use your words in quotation marks.
     >> > >
     >> > >    In fact I don't agree with you about the intellectual advancement
     >> > point.
     >> > > Climate impacts are in fact mostly expressed by the details of
     >weather.
     >> So
     >> > > at any level weather and climate are intimately intertwined - basic
     >> > science
     >> > > or impacts. NERC currently spends over 60M per annum on climate
     >change
     >> > but
     >> > > rather little on weather research.
     >> > >
     >> > >     I agree that the tipping points are important to understand. But I
     >> > > remain to be convinced about intermediate complexity models (ICM) as a
     >> > tool
     >> > > to inform policy. Current full-complexity climate models are pretty
     >> coarse
     >> > > grain and I think we need to be more up front about the large
     >> > uncertainties
     >> > > in them. Computing resources are such that we can, if we pool them,
     >run
     >> at
     >> > > much higher resolution than currently. Then we can have credible
     >> > > simulations. Removing some of the complexity (in a ICM) seems to me to
     >> be
     >> > an
     >> > > intellectually backward step. If we had access to computing power like
     >> the
     >> > > Earth Simulator we could keep the complexity. Producing a bad answer
     >now
     >> > (by
     >> > > throwing out some of the known physics) is probably worse than waiting
     >> a
     >> > > little while until we can get close to the right answer. There are
     >> enough
     >> > > known unknowns without throwing out some known knowns!
     >> > >
     >> > >    Advances in climate and weather models go hand in hand so funding
     >> one
     >> > is
     >> > > useful to the other. This is not just philosophy, it works
     >practically -
     >> > > this is why the Hadley Centre is number one in the world actually.
     >> > >
     >> > >                 Alan
     >> > >
     >> > > -------------------
     >> > > > Dear Alan,
     >> > > >
     >> > > > I am sorry for - inadvertantly - alarming you. My response to your
     >> note
     >> > > > comes in two pieces.
     >> > > >
     >> > > > 1. I did not make the statement in question at the ESOF 2004. I had
     >a
     >> > > phone
     >> > > > chat with Alex Kirby, BBC, some time before the conference, where we
     >> may
     >> > > > have touched upon the relative importance of weather vs. climate
     >> > research,
     >> > > > and I possibly said that the balance is still not right. I certainly
     >> did
     >> > > not
     >> > > > say that we are spending TOO MUCH on weather forecasting - the
     >> > proportion
     >> > > > would have to be corrected by INCREASING the funds for climate
     >change
     >> > > > science, of course.
     >> > > >
     >> > > > 2. My quintessential point, however, remains the concern that we
     >might
     >> > > > miss/overlook the points of no return in the Earth System, i.e., the
     >> > > > strategic intervention options, while we push the weather forecast
     >> > horizon
     >> > > > by a day or so per decade, using incredible amounts of human
     >ingenuity
     >> > and
     >> > > > resources. The latter is important, but - perhaps - less crucial
     >right
     >> > now
     >> > > > while we may be about to destabilize the planetary machinery at
     >large!
     >> > So
     >> > > > it's " first things first! ".
     >> > > >
     >> > > > I assume that you have a similar perspective on the relative
     >> importance
     >> > of
     >> > > > intellectual advancement. I fully appreciate your point about a
     >> holistic
     >> > > > approach, yet we may not have the time to wait until the all-
     >> timescales
     >> > > > hierarchy of fluid dynamics models has emerged through bottom-up
     >> > > evolution.
     >> > > > Physics-based models of intermediate complexity or preliminary 3D
     >> Earth
     >> > > > System models might be needed in the meantime and have to be
     >properly
     >> > > > funded. I'd be happy to pursue this debate if you feel that you
     >cannot
     >> > > agree
     >> > > > with me here.
     >> > > >
     >> > > > On the other hand, I PROMISE to make sure that any statement of mine
     >> on
     >> > > the
     >> > > > weather-climate nexus cannot be misused for dividing the community -
     >> nor
     >> > > for
     >> > > > letting the funders off some hook.
     >> > > >
     >> > > > Regards,
     >> > > > John
     >> > > >
     >> > > >
     >> > > >   Original Message -----
     >> > > > From: "Alan Thorpe" <a.j.thorpe@reading.ac.uk>
     >> > > > To: <h.j.schellnhuber@uea.ac.uk>
     >> > > > Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 10:44 AM
     >> > > > Subject: Weather and climate
     >> > > >
     >> > > >
     >> > > > > John,
     >> > > > >
     >> > > > >    I was alarmed to see you quoted in the Times Higher Education
     >> > > > Supplement
     >> > > > > this week: "We're investing too much in things like improving the
     >> > > accuracy
     >> > > > > of our weather forecasts ........". I hope it is a mis-quote but I
     >> see
     >> > > > that
     >> > > > > the BBC website gives the same quote as coming from a talk you
     >gave
     >> at
     >> > a
     >> > > > > Euro conference in August.
     >> > > > >
     >> > > > >     Aside from the socio-economic benefits of weather forecasts,
     >> which
     >> > > are
     >> > > > > huge, any suggestion of a dichotomy between weather and climate
     >> > > prediction
     >> > > > > is false. Climate impacts will come in major part through weather
     >> > events
     >> > > > and
     >> > > > > it will be the forecasting of these that actually matters to
     >> society.
     >> > > Also
     >> > > > > climate models have at their core global weather models and are
     >> > actually
     >> > > > > only as good as their ability to describe accurately the weather
     >> > systems
     >> > > > and
     >> > > > > their nonlinear averaging as input to climate.  So improving
     >weather
     >> > > > > forecasts helps to improve climate forecasts. I, and a lot of
     >> others,
     >> > > have
     >> > > > > been trying hard to stop any wedge being driven between weather
     >and
     >> > > > climate
     >> > > > > research. We are working towards a holistic and integrated
     >> forecasting
     >> > > > > system on time ranges from minutes to decades.
     >> > > > >
     >> > > > >                Alan
     >> > > > >
     >> > > > > *********************************************************
     >> > > > > Professor Alan J. Thorpe
     >> > > > > Director, NERC Centres for Atmospheric Science
     >> > > > > Dept of Meteorology, University of Reading,
     >> > > > > Earley Gate, PO Box 243, Reading RG6 6BB
     >> > > > >
     >> > > > > Tel: + 44 (0) 118 931 6979/6452
     >> > > > > Fax: + 44 (0) 118 931 6462
     >> > > > > Mobile: 0774 771 5842
     >> > > > > Email: A.J.Thorpe@reading.ac.uk
     >> > > > > Web: [3]http://ncas.nerc.ac.uk
     >> > > > >
     >> > > > > *********************************************************
     >> > > > >
     >> > > >
     >> > > >
     >> > >
     >> > >
     >> > > *********************************************************
     >> > > Professor Alan J. Thorpe
     >> > > Director, NERC Centres for Atmospheric Science
     >> > > Dept of Meteorology, University of Reading,
     >> > > Earley Gate, PO Box 243, Reading RG6 6BB
     >> > >
     >> > > Tel: + 44 (0) 118 931 6979/6452
     >> > > Fax: + 44 (0) 118 931 6462
     >> > > Mobile: 0774 771 5842
     >> > > Email: A.J.Thorpe@reading.ac.uk
     >> > > Web: [4]http://ncas.nerc.ac.uk
     >> > >
     >> > > *********************************************************
     >> > >
     >> >
     >> >
     >>
     >>

   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
   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

