FULL TEXT Search

As a corollary of this responsiveness, stomatal frequency analysis of fossil leaves enables the detection and quantification of atmospheric CO2 changes at different time scales (14, 17-25).” [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-48)] TS-119 A 6:11 6:35 Looks like the the ref. to Fig TS1 should be TS2 (line 11) and TS2 should be TS1 (line 35) Agreed.

Measurements have been made by several [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-2)] labs around the word and they provide identical results.

The body of the report says that only “projections” - not “predictions” - are possible. [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-40)] TS-40 A 3:28 3:29 This parenthetic definition of the climate system excludes (unfrozen) soils and rivers of the Not practical to list each of the many continents.

[2.3] [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-44)] TS-87 A 5:33 5:34 Replace "The dominant " by "An important" Changes in the sun may also be important See comment TS-86 [VINCENT GRAY (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 88-1902)] TS-88 A 5:33 5:41 The reader needs better guidance as to where to find the information supporting this Table is too large to include further statement.

[Lenny Bernstein (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 20-17)] TS-162 A 7:3 7:3 I strongly suggest that the emission rates either be reported for years (e.g. 2004) based on Accepted.

Science vol. 284 p 92 (1999)). [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-49)] TS- A 55:0 55: Explanation for symbols used in graphic TS-1 is missing Figure redrawn and caption changed 1235 [Govt. of Germany (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 2011-224)] TS- A 55:0 Fig.

would provide a greater negative feedback than the effect of a doubling of carbon dioxide with the maximum possible positive radiative feedback from water vapour. [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-43)] TS-58 A 4:32 4:35 These spurious "statistical" categories are just self-assessed guesses Rejected - the bases for probabilistic [VINCENT GRAY (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 88-1901)] assessments of likelihoods are covered in the report.

The statement that, “Present atmospheric levels of methane are unprecedented in at least the last half million years.” is a blatant lie. Delete it. [Richard S Courtney] 2-38 A 14:9 14:17 The statements in the paragraph on Page 2-14 Chapter 2 Section 2.3.2 Lines 9 to 17 are Comment not scientific in nature such arrant nonsense that they are not worthy of mention and, therefore, the paragraph should be deleted.

.”. [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-64)] TS-199 A 8:25 8:25 Insert after "declined" , "to zero" Rejected - growth rate values are cited [VINCENT GRAY (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 88-1917)] in the text and are not zero.

If the natural system of sinks copes with the emissions as they occur then the emissions cannot accumulate. [Richard S Courtney] 2-34 A 11:54 11:54 A frustration of attempting to peer review this astonishingly poor draft report is the clear Rejected.