From: Stefan Rahmstorf To: David Rind Subject: Re: [Wg1-ar4-ch06] Comments on Section 6.3 Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 12:39:05 +0200 Cc: Eystein Jansen Dear chapter 6 friends, I have a request on procedure. In the interest of a good and constructive working atmosphere, I would suggest that all of us focus on sober scientific arguments and refrain from unneccessarily derogatory comments about the work of colleagues. I'm referring in this case to David's comment - this reference is overused, especially for such a simplistic model The reference concerned is our theory of DO events which appeared in Nature in 2001 and has since been cited 133 times according to the Web of Science (a sign of overuse?) The model concerned is the CLIMBER-2 model, featured in over 50 peer-reviewed publications since 1998, including 7 in Nature and Science. This model is different from David's model, because it has been constructed for a differenet purpose, but it is not "simplistic". It would never occur to me to call David's model "simplistic" because it does not include an interactive continental ice sheet model, vegetation model, carbon cycle model, sediment model and isotope model. I'm absolutely open to any rational scientific criticism and discussion, but I can see no purpose in derogatory statements like the above, which include not even a trace of scientific argument. This kind of thing only poisons the working atmosphere in our group, which I thought was very positive and a great pleasure in Beijing. Regards, Stefan -- To reach me directly please use: [1][e-mail] (My former addresses @pik-potsdam.de are read by my assistant Brigitta.) Stefan Rahmstorf [2]www.ozean-klima.de [3]www.realclimate.org _______________________________________________ Wg1-ar4-ch06 mailing list [e-mail] http://www.joss.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/wg1-ar4-ch06 References 1. mailto:[e-mail] 2. http://www.ozean-klima.de/ 3. http://www.realclimate.org/