FULL TEXT Search

Science vol. 284 p 92 (1999)). [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-52)] TS- A 57:5 57:5 This diagram is misleading as it does not show inaccuracies.

Accepted 528 [Govt. of Netherlands (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 2016-6)] SPM- A 6:42 Replace “large-scale values” with “results”.

The IPCC will now disregard this work of Mann et al. and recommends that all others should also disregard it until it can be - and has been - independently replicated.” [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-17)] SPM- A 9:21 9:24 suggest including figure TS-23, as this gives an update of the information given See SPM 808 817 in graphical form in the TAR, which has been used and discussed widely.

Indeed, the actual warming is not known but - on the basis of the radiosonde and MSU data - it seems most likely to have been less than 0.1 degrees C per decade from 1990- 2005 [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-30)] SPM- A 12:8 12:1 This paragraph ignores the fact that most of the warming took place prior to Rejected, see chapter 3 for discussion of temperature 1094 2 1998 and there has been no warming trend in the years since.

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 #: 49-55)] TS-153 A 6:48 6:49 Change "was almost" to "had been essentially" and change ", before" to "prior to" Text edited [Michael MacCracken (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 152-65)] TS-154 A 6:53 7:55 TS Comment: Delete this paragraph because it is untrue.

Nonsense of the kind in lines 26 and 27 causes doubt concerning the scientific competence and the integrity of the authors of the draft. [Richard S Courtney] 2-24 A 8:27 8:27 Replace “These forcings could be significant on local scales” with “These forcings could We do not agree.

meant here, and that is standard practicc in all science. [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-27)] SPM- A 11:4 11:4 SPM Comment: Delete “, representing a major advance over the TAR”.

Rejected - likely explanations for the [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-63)] growth rate decline and variability are covered in Chapter 7 TS-197 A 8:24 8:24 Change "ppm" to "ppb".

Text says there is an effect, not that it 954 5 8 “differences in the magnitudes of model simulations and observed changes are accounts for all changes observed not understood” then there cannot be any valid basis for the assertion that “human influences are likely to have contributed to” the modelled effects. [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-23)] SPM- A 11:1 11:1 Insert after Do not understand comment 955 5 5 [VINCENT GRAY (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 88-2223)] SPM- A 11:1 11:1 The first sentence is difficult to sustain in light of thermodynamic principles and Rejected, see underlying chapter for details.

time. [Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-9)] SPM- A 6:31 6:31 Warming.....