Michael Tobis wrote: > Also we must consider the possibility that IPCC 2001 was too > optimistic. It will be interesting to see the new WGI report, to say > the least. I am starting to wonder why it is late.
Is it? I see that the timetable has been updated recently. I don't have the previous version for comparison, but it looks like it is mostly just adding details: http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/docs/wg1_timetable_2006-08-14.pdf Oh, a little googling finds an earlier version: http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/ipcc/wg1-4ar-timetable.pdf James --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
