date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 10:42:00 +0000 from: Tim Osborn subject: Re: Fwd: 2005GL024674 Request to Review from Geophysical Research to: Keith Briffa Keith - I've been asked to separately review this. Obviously we can't both agree to act as two separate reviewers. It's probably/possibly SO&P-funded, which might be seen as a conflict, though I'm sure we'd be as rigorous as ever! Though it sounds interesting, I'd say no due to lack to time (I've got a different manuscript to review at the moment). Cheers Tim At 10:40 01/11/2005, you wrote: >do WE wish to do this? >K >>X-Mailer: MIME::Lite 3.01 (F2.6; B2.11; Q2.03) >>Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 19:49:34 UT >>To: K.Briffa@uea.ac.uk >>Subject: 2005GL024674 Request to Review from Geophysical Research Letters >>From: grlonline@agu.org >>Reply-To: amacinnes@agu.org >>X-UEA-Spam-Score: 0.2 >>X-UEA-Spam-Level: / >>X-UEA-Spam-Flag: NO >> >> >>Dear Dr. Briffa: >> >>Would you be willing and available to review "On the influence of >>undetrended calibrations of proxy-based climate reconstructions of >>the past centuries" by Eduardo Zorita, Fidel Gonzalez-Rouco, Hans >>von Storch, submitted for possible publication in the Geophysical >>Research Letters. >> >>The manuscript's abstract is: >> >> Statistical temperature reconstructions rely on the calibration >>of proxy indicators against instrumental temperatures, usually >>at interannual timescales. Calibrations may be accomplished with >>detrended or non-detrended data. >>Non-detrended calibration assumes that centennial trends in >>the proxies can be completely ascribed to 20th century climate >>change and that >>relationship between temperature and proxy trends is the same at >>interanual-decadal and centennial and longer timescales. >>A test of the validity of these assumptions is proposed that can be >>applied to all multiproxy methods. This test is illustrated in one >>regression-based reconstruction of the Northern Hemisphere >>temperature (NHT) of the last centuries, showing that both >>assumptions are not fulfilled in this particular reconstruction. >>The influence of non-climate trends in the proxies (centennial >>noise) is explored analyzing pseudo-reconstructions in a >>simulation of the last millennium with a general circulation >>model. They are found to further contribute to the >>underestimation of the reconstructed NHT variations. >> >>If you agree to review this manuscript, I would ask for your >>comments within 14 days from your acceptance. >> >>To ACCEPT, click on the link below: >> >> >> >> >> >>If you are unable to review this manuscript at this time, I would >>appreciate any suggestions of other potential reviewers who would >>be qualified to examine this manuscript. (Via reply e-mail.) >> >>To DECLINE, click on the link below: >> >> >> >> >> >>If you have any questions or need more information feel free to >>reply to this e-mail. >> >>Thank you for your consideration and support of Geophysical Research Letters. >> >>Sincerely, >> >>Rangasayi Halthore >>Associate Editor >>Geophysical Research Letters > >-- >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/ 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