FULL TEXT Search

[Richard S Courtney] 2-42 A 16:56 17:1 Replace from, “Nevertheless the effect …” to “… of the halocarbon RF which” with “The Do not agrree with logic of arguement growth of the halocarbon RF has substantially reduced.

Jacobson MZ, Nature, vol. 409, 695-697 (2000). [Richard S Courtney] 2-55 A 28:5 28:5 Replace “Major progress over the results” with “Substantial developments of the models Reference cited used to provide the results” because the statement is incorrect.

[Richard Courtney (Reviewer’s comment ID #: 49-62)] TS-157 A 7:1 7:1 ….fossil fuel combustion'.

American Journal of Botany, 90, pp 610-619 (2003), Wagner F et al. Science vol. 284 p 92 (1999)). [Richard S Courtney] 1-71 A 37:35 37:35 For completeness and accuracy, after “… absorbed solar energy.” it is very important to Taken into account.

Batch From To Comment Notes authors have extreme confusion concerning the difference between model emulation and empirical observation of reality: this error is one example of the confusion). [Richard S Courtney] 1-58 A 24:10 24:11 For accuracy, replace the sentence, “This finding .. Stouffer et al., 1994).” with “Similar Rejected. The suggested wording does studies using variability estimates from more complex coupled ocean-atmosphere general not add to clarity or brevity.

[Richard S Courtney] 2-60 A 41:22 41:23 Delete the sentence, “Another uncertainty …” to “… RF estimates” because it is untrue. Source of uncertanity adopted, as The word “uncertainty” in the draft Report is used to mean “source of uncertainty” and suggested this usage clearly causes problems for the authors.

and with the explanation of climate that precedes the statement. The text of all the FAQs has been [Richard S Courtney] extensively revised. 1-73 A 38:11 38:11 Replace the statement “a climate forecast … rainier than normal” with “a climate forecast Rejected.

[Richard S Courtney] 2-32 A 10:39 10:40 Delete from “showing a strong correlation …” to “… concentrations (Keeling et al., Agree that “strong correlation” was 2005)” because the correlation is not strong, and the cited graph (Figure 2.3.1) merely over stressed - text reworded in draft.

American Journal of Botany, 90, pp 610-619 (2003), Wagner F et al. Science vol. 284 p 92 (1999)). [Richard S Courtney] 2-35 A 12:18 12:19 The statement that ice core measurements indicated atmospheric methane concentrations Rejected. Do not agree with their in year 1992 must be false because the firn from 1992 has yet to seal.

The radiative component of the greenhouse effect is” [Richard S Courtney] 1-77 A 40:23 40:24 Replace the phrase, “The natural greenhouse effect” with “The natural radiative Rejected for the reasons stated in the component of the greenhouse effect” because the statement in the draft Answer is response to comment (1-76).