cc: Ray Bradley <rbradley@geo.umass.edu>, k.briffa@uea.ac.uk, mhughes@ltrr.arizona.edu, Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>, t.osborn@uea.ac.uk
date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 16:53:34 -0700
from: "Malcolm Hughes" <mhughes@ltrr.arizona.edu>
subject: Re: 
to: Scott Rutherford <srutherford@gso.uri.edu>

Deear Scott - please find attached the mss with some suggested changes - I 
have used track changes. My comments are very similar to Tim's. We could 
drop the CE and the mixed hybrid. I'm not so sure about dropping the Esper 
comparison, but son't fell strongly about it either way. After making the 
changes, it also occurred to me that the criterion for weighting the high or low 
frequency components could give too much weight to poor low freuquency 
records with no high frequency and undervalue records with good signal in 
both wavebands, so that when it comes to the next generation of 
reconstructions we should use a different approach to weighting.
Cheers, MalcolmMalcolm Hughes
Professor of Dendrochronology
Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
520-621-6470
fax 520-621-8229

