cc: Henry Pollack <hpollack@umich.edu>,Keith Briffa <k.briffa@uea.ac.uk>, Eystein Jansen <eystein.jansen@geo.uib.no>, Jonathan Overpeck <jto@u.arizona.edu>
date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 14:14:43 +0100
from: Tim Osborn <t.osborn@uea.ac.uk>
subject: Re: SH figure for IPCC AR4
to: Jason E Smerdon <jsmerdon@umich.edu>

<x-flowed>
Thanks for the comments Jason/Henry.  Just wanted to let you know that I've 
dropped the uncertainty ranges to be consistent with the other records and 
also cut the borehole series at the median sampling dates.

Cheers

Tim


At 16:45 04/08/2005, Jason E Smerdon wrote:
>Hi Tim,
>
>Henry and I apologize for not being available the last few days.  Henry 
>has been out of town and I have been in the midst of moving to New York. 
>Nevertheless, we had the chance to cross paths today and discuss the 
>figure and caption.  We hope it is not too late to add our two cents.
>
>We agree that the uncertainties on the borehole curves should be removed 
>to make the display more consistent.  We have also decided that it would 
>be best to truncate the borehole curves at their median logging dates. For 
>Australia and Africa those years are 1972 and 1986, respectively.  If you 
>wish to discuss the sampling densities, the total number of boreholes in 
>Australia and Africa are 57 and 92, respectively.  The SH has a total of 
>165 holes, compared to 695 in the NH.
>
>Let us know if you need anything else.  I hope this has not arrived too 
>late and good luck with everything.
>
>Best Regards,
>Jason

Dr Timothy J Osborn
Climatic Research Unit
School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia
Norwich  NR4 7TJ, UK

e-mail:   t.osborn@uea.ac.uk
phone:    +44 1603 592089
fax:      +44 1603 507784
web:      http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/
sunclock: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/sunclock.htm

</x-flowed>
