date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:28:03 -0400 from: Edward Cook subject: Re: Fwd: revised NH comparison manuscript to: Keith Briffa

Yeah, "moot" is the proper term. I will try to be mute on the issue for a while now. I just got out of jury duty. I almost got on a jury for a murder trial with possible sequestering. My scheduled trip with Nic for his Uni orientation the end of this month saved the day. Cheers, Ed >take your point re that's enough - but I have to point out your >Freudian slip re "moot point" or as you would have it when associted >with Mike Mann - hopefully "Mute point" ! >love to Michelle >Keith > > >At 09:32 AM 7/15/03 -0400, you wrote: >>Hi Keith, >> >>Thanks for the paper and help in toning down Mike's efforts to put >>a stake in the Esper heart. I quickly read the paragraph you >>mention. Undoubtedly part of what is said is true, but it doesn't >>explain it all of the differences between the original MBH >>reconstruction and any of the other NH recons. Now that Mike has >>moved on to a totally new NH recon, I suppose all of this is a mute >>point. However, your Blowing Hot and Cold piece clearly showed that >>the MBH estimates were undoubtedly deficient in low-frequency >>variability compared to ANY other recon. Enough said. I need to >>enjoy myself. >> >>Cheers, >> >>Ed >> >>>Ed >>>Thought you should see this (in confidence) . Have succeeded in >>>getting reasonable citation to your work and much toning down of >>>criticism of Esper et al in first draft ( see last paragraph >>>before Section C) . Cheers >>>Keith >>> >>>P.S. Do not ask me why Ray, Malcolm and Phil are on this cause I >>>don't know - work cam out of stuff Tim did with Scott when >>>visiting there last year. >>> >>>>Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 14:51:09 -0400 >>>>Subject: revised NH comparison manuscript >>>>Cc: Mike Mann >>>>To: Malcolm Hughes , >>>> Raymond Bradley , Tim Osborn >>>>, >>>> Keith Briffa , Phil Jones >>>>From: Scott Rutherford >>>>X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Attached to this e-mail is a revision of the northern hemisphere >>>>comparison manuscript. First some general comments. I tried as >>>>best as possible to incorporate everyone's suggestions. Typically >>>>this meant adding/deleting or clarifying text. There were cases >>>>where we disagreed with the suggested changes and tried to >>>>clarify in the text why. >>>> >>>>In this next round of changes I encourage everyone to make >>>>specific suggestions in terms of wording and references (e.g. >>>>Rutherford et al. GRL 1967 instead of "see my GRL paper"). I >>>>also encourage everyone to make suggestions directly in the file >>>>in coloured text or by using Microsquish Word's "Track Changes" >>>>function (this will save me deciphering cryptic penmanship; >>>>although I confess, my writing is worse than anyone's). If you >>>>would prefer to use the editing functions in Adobe Acrobat let me >>>>know and I will send a PDF file. If you still feel strongly that >>>>I have not adequately addressed an issue please say so. >>>>I will incorporate the suggestions from this upcoming round into >>>>a manuscript to be submitted. After review, everyone will get a >>>>crack at it again. >>>> >>>>I will not detail every change made (if anyone wants the file >>>>with the changes tracked I can send it). Here are the major >>>>changes: >>>> >>>>1) removal of mixed-hybrid approach and revised discussions/figures >>>>2) removal of CE scores from the verification tables >>>>3) downscaling of the Esper comparison to a single figure panel >>>>and one paragraph. >>>>4) revised discussion of spatial maps and revised figure (figure 8). >>>>5) seasonal comparisons have been revised >>>> >>>>Several suggestions have been made for where to submit. These are >>>>listed on page 1 of the manuscript. Please indicate your >>>>preference ASAP and I will tally the votes. >>>> >>>>I would like to submit by late July, so if you could please get >>>>me comments by say July 15 that would be great. I will send out a >>>>reminder in early July. If I don't hear from you by July 15 I >>>>will assume that you are comfortable with the manuscript. >>>> >>>>Please let me know if you have difficulty with the file or would >>>>prefer a different format. >>>> >>>>Regards, >>>> >>>>Scott >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>______________________________________________ >>>> Scott Rutherford >>>> >>>>Marine Research Scientist >>>>Graduate School of Oceanography >>>>University of Rhode Island >>>>e-mail: srutherford@gso.uri.edu >>>>phone: (401) 874-6599 >>>>fax: (401) 874-6811 >>>>snail mail: >>>>South Ferry Road >>>>Narragansett, RI 02882 >>> >>>-- >>>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/ >>> >>>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:nhcomparison_v7_1.doc >>>(WDBN/MSWD) (0008AC53) >> >> >>-- >>================================== >>Dr. Edward R. Cook >>Doherty Senior Scholar and >>Director, Tree-Ring Laboratory >>Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory >>Palisades, New York 10964 USA >>Email: drdendro@ldeo.columbia.edu >>Phone: 845-365-8618 >>Fax: 845-365-8152 >>================================== > >-- >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. Edward R. Cook Doherty Senior Scholar and Director, Tree-Ring Laboratory Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory Palisades, New York 10964 USA Email: drdendro@ldeo.columbia.edu Phone: 845-365-8618 Fax: 845-365-8152 ==================================