date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:35:08 +0100 from: Lisette Klok subject: Re: my paper to: Keith Briffa Dear Keith, We have read the review. Also to us the criticism is not always clear. However, we will revise some parts of the article and I will send the revised article to John Matthews next week. Regards, Lisette Klok >Lisette >I would like you and your co=author to read the very brief review >below. I have failed o produce >another. Please give me your opinion. Part of my problem is that >this review is specialised in >some ways that I am not qualified to assess. Unfortunately , while >it also states that the paper should be published it is not clear >what are substantive criticisms and what are "opinions" . Also the >remarks about the disorganized style of a section of the paper are >not too helpful without some details. I therefore really wanted >another qualified and perhaps more detailed opinion. It is not fair >to continue trying to get other reviews by now. Hence , I suggest >you do a revision as you see fit and send a detailed response to >these points to John Matthews directly , who should have handled >this in the first place(!) - please do not quote me on that. - Also >send the revised manuscript and top copies of Figures as the paper >is now officially "accepted subject to satisfactory modifications" >that will be checked by John. >I can only apologize again for all this - but your paper and one >other glacier paper have been very difficult to get reviewed >properly. Please forgive us . >best wishes >Keith > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Review of: >DERIVING A CLIMATE HISTORY FROM A GLACIER LENGTH RECORD BY LINEAR >INVERSE MODELLING >Klok and Oerlemans >Submitted to The Holocene >The paper says (p. 3) that a "climate signal" can be extracted from a >glacier length record. However, the "climate signal" is obviously a >mass balance history or a reconstruction of equilibrium line >altitude (ELA). This make me wonder if we are really talking about a >"climate signal" or "climate history". I would expect something about >temperature and precipitation here. >The median elevation of a glacier (p. 3) according to Manley (1959) >is not the real median. The simple methods to reconstruct ELA >were never intended to consider or include response time. There are >certainly more methods than listed here, e.g. see Benn and Lehmkuhl >(2000). >The author admits that a numerical flowline model (p. 3) would be >best but says that their aim is to develop a simple "analytical" >model that should be more applicable. I am not sure what they mean >with "analytical". Other terminology is a problem. For example, they >define "climate sensitivity" in terms of the change in glacier length >with a change in the ELA, while this term is already well understood >by climate modellers. Equations (1) and (2) look quite scientific but >they don't really express much more than the fact that almost any >phenomenon can be described by a Taylor series, truncated after the >first term. >I have real problems calculating time derivatives with fitted >polynomials and filtered data (p. 6). >On p. 7 and p. 11 they cite an non-existent publication (Oerlemans, >2001) which appears to provide important background. >On p. 8, nu (a Greek letter that I can't print in my mail program) is >defined as a ratio of mean glacier thickness to glacier length but is >taken as zero on p. 9. How can that be? >I can't help thinking that the authors make a bit of a mystery about >their "analytical" model. A simple conceptual relation between >glacier length change and change of ELA was proposed by Callendar >(1950). As this relation includes two different glacier widths (at >the snout and at the ELA) and slope at the ELA it is a reasonably >sophisticated predecessor of their model. The authors should at least >reference Callendar's model. >The approach is interesting and certainly deserves publication in the >Holocene but I don't find this a very reader-friendly paper. Pages >12-17 seem very discursive and approach is rather unsystematic. The >authors should tighten up the text and even consider changes of >structure. >REFERENCE >Benn, D. I. and F. Lehmkuhl. 2000. Mass balance and equilibrium-line >altitudes of glaciers in high-mountain environments. Quaternary >International 65/66, 15-29. >Callendar, G. S. 1950. Note on the relation between the height of >the firn line and dimensions of a glacier. Journal of Glaciology >1(8), 459-461. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >At 11:42 AM 2/27/02 +0100, you wrote: > >>Thanks, >>I will wait for some more time. >>Lisette >> >>>Lisette >>>I am working to sort out the reviews on this paper. I have to say >>>that I have had genuine hell with one reviewer who was not >>>positive - to an extent that I considered it important for you to >>>at least address their concerns. HOWEVER, these concerns were not >>>made officially in a form that I could communicate specifically to >>>you . The reviewer then kept me waiting for a long time for >>>written confirmation and specification of their concerns , and I >>>have been pressing hard to get these. I am trying to resolve the >>>situation without going to a third referee (that I should have >>>done before ). I will continue to try to resolve this very shortly. >>>Keith >>> >>>At 09:21 AM 2/18/02 +0100, you wrote: >>> >>>>Dear Keith Briffa, >>>> >>>>To remind you: >>>>Have the reviewers already responded? >>>> >>>>Best wishes, >>>> >>>>Lisette Klok >>>> >>>>-- >>>> >>>> >>>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>Lisette Klok >>>>Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research, >>>>Utrecht University >>>>Princetonplein 5 >>>>3584 CC Utrecht >>>>the Netherlands >>>>tel: ++31 30 2535781 >>>>fax: ++31 30 2543163 >>>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> >>> >>>-- >>>Professor Keith Briffa, >>>Climatic Research Unit >>>University of East Anglia >>>Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K. >>> >>>Phone: +44-1603-593909 >>>Fax: +44-1603-507784 >>> >>>http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/ >>> >> >>-- >> >> >>++++++++++++++++ >>Lisette Klok >>IMAU >>Princetonplein 5 >>3584 CC Utrecht >>tel: 030-2535781 >>fax: 030-2543163 >>++++++++++++++++ >> >-- >Professor Keith Briffa, >Climatic Research Unit >University of East Anglia >Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K. > >Phone: +44-1603-593909 >Fax: +44-1603-507784 > >http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/ -- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Lisette Klok Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research, Utrecht University Princetonplein 5 3584 CC Utrecht the Netherlands tel: ++31 30 2535781 fax: ++31 30 2543163 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++