cc: "Jones, Phil" , "Kennedy, John" date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:49:58 -0500 from: Thomas C Peterson subject: Re: JGR Comment to: David Parker Great. Thanks, David. I have two minor comments. One is where you state the data are "almost independent". Almost begs a question, which is partially answered later. I wonder if "essentially independent" would be better. The other point that might be missed by some readers is that no station appeared in both analyses. So perhaps working in a line saying, "not only do these analyses use completely different stations but " the adjustments .... The second point is about the text about Hale et al. 2008. To nearly quote a comment that you, David, made about something I wrote during an AOPC meeting (back in the good old days when Mike Manton had us up writing things until the wee hours), I think 62 words may be a tad long for a single sentence. Also, do you want to be explicit in saying that comparison to a likely inhomogeneous data set is a serious flaw? Whatever you choose to do or not do on these points is fine with me. John, thank you for the sparser sampling experiment. Regards, Tom David Parker said the following on 11/17/2008 1:06 PM: > Phil, Tom, John > > Now that John has done the new sparser-sampling experiment, I am > attaching a revised version of our Comment: it has a new Fig. 1 and > tracked amendments to the text to reflect this and the reviewers > comments. Also attached is my response to the reviewers, and a pdf of > Fig. 1 supplied by John with a map demonstrating the sub-sampling. > > Comments welcome! > > Thanks > > David > > -- Thomas C. Peterson, Ph.D. NOAA's National Climatic Data Center 151 Patton Avenue Asheville, NC 28801 Voice: +1-828-271-4287 Fax: +1-828-271-4876