From: Caspar Ammann 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