Wednesday, January 18, 2012

2032.txt

cc: <k.briffaatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, <p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, <hpollackatXYZxyzch.edu>
date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 12:17:45 -0700
from: "Shaopeng Huang" <shaopengatXYZxyzch.edu>
to: "Tim Osborn" <t.osbornatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, <drdendroatXYZxyzo.columbia.edu>

Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="gb2312"
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by jeffreys.geo.lsa.umich.edu id MAA09725

Hi All,

As promised earlier, I am sharing you with the experimental results of the
subsurface temperature anomalies calculated from Espert et al reconstruction
(ECS) and from Mann et al reconstruction (MBH). Attached is an illustration
showing the calculated anomalies as compared to the borehole observation.

The borehole observation shown with error bar in black is assembled from
more than 200 boreholes located in the Northern Hemisphere and logged in the
1990s. Due to various constraints on the borehole data (in particularly,
non-climatic noises and the attenuated resolution power toward more remote
past), the experiment is focused on the most recent five centuries of the
proxy reconstructions. In the calculation the baseline of each
reconstruction is respectively set to be its own 1200-1499 mean. The upper
panel of the illustration shows the base-line embedded time series used as
forcing to drive the Earth. The lower panel shows the resultant subsurface
temperature anomalies. ECS is shown in blue and MBH in red. Since I don��t
have the original ECS annual series, a 50-year smoothened version kindly
provided by Tim Osborn is employed.

I hope you would find this comparison interesting.

Regards,
Shaopeng

Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\bt.pdf"

No comments:

Post a Comment