To: "Michael E. Mann" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: possible rewording of section of letter?
Date: Tue Jun 10 15:23:53 2003
thanks and all now ok
At 10:30 AM 6/10/03 -0400, you wrote:
no problem...Responses below. let me know what you think...
At 03:01 PM 6/10/2003 +0100, Keith Briffa wrote:
thanks for that Mike - sorry but just a few more questions
the reference to "agree remarkably well with the proxy-based reconstructions (Figure 1)
" [later part of paragraph ] . Unfortunately , the Bauer et al curve clearly does not -
at least from AD 1100 to 1400!
Again some qualifyer is needed - perhaps "for the most part , agree well " ?
Yes, "remarkably" is an overstatement given that, as you say, Bauer et al does stray
How about simply:
"Agree with the proxy-based reconstructions within estimated uncertainties (Figure 1)".
and later [middle of the 6th paragraph],
"relative hemispheric warmth during the 10th to 12th centuries" is ambiguous and we
prefer "relative hemispheric warmth during much of the the 10th,11th and 12th centuries"
but also , where we say [just below] "the specific periods of cold and warm apparent for
Europe differ significantly from those for the Northern Hemisphere as a whole." , to
what evidence of European anomalies are we referring?
ahh--I left that open-ended, for Phil and you guys to deal with as you see best. I was
anticipating that Figure 2 would include an appropriate proxy series or two for Europe
(CET, Fennoscandia?) that would make this point. But why don't you guys revise the
wording, as necessary, based on Figure 2?
Professor Michael E. Mann
Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903
e-mail: email@example.com Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137
Professor Keith Briffa,
Climatic Research Unit
University of East Anglia
Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.