date: Wed Feb 24 09:56:24 1999 from: Keith Briffa subject: Re: Fennoscandian chron(3) to: Håkan Grudd , grudd@natgeo.su.se, Matti.Eronen@Helsinki.fi, pentti.zetterberg@joensuu.fi, Mauri.Timonen@metla.fi This is good news and as far as I can see , the gap really is no more. At this time I think it is important if everyone could now confirm the bridge that Hakan showed in Norwich. Mauri and Pentti, can you also say whether this is correct . Mauri, was this what you were saying in your last message or do you still have a different match? I think that a short paper describing the reality of a continuous 7000-year-plus series should not wait until the special issue. I suggest Hakan tries to draft something first and the rest of us have a go at improving it. Obviously , a high profile paper such as Nature or Science would be great, but we must be realistic about the likelyhood of getting it accepted without an additional 'message' which in my opinion is not clear at this point - though many possible approaches are feasible. They would require extra work. So what about a paper to a journal like Geophysical Research Letters. It is highly rated and fast. The big danger now is that the job is seen by others as finished. In many ways this is the end of the first stage of research. I am still keen to write something on the whole issue of time-dependent signals in the data and the increasing uncertainty in the expression of signals on different timescales. Anyway, well done everyone - provided we hear back positively from Pentti and Mauri. At 04:13 PM 2/22/99 +0100, Håkan Grudd wrote: > >Dear friends, > >This is to report on the progress with the Fennoscandian chronology. > >As I wrote in my previous e-mail I assume that the crossmatch I presented >in Norwich is correct. This is supported by the wiggle match. Since then >Mauri has adopted this dating. > >Last week I got more data from Rovaniemi and was able to run them against >my data, and also against the Johensuu data from Pentti. So far I have >found no problems with the dating. Mauri is also testing the same set of >data, using the same dating, and I believe he also finds it to be correct. >Now we also need Pentti's confirmation of these dates. > >I have attached one file with a figure that shows the relation between the >three data sets and the combined Fennoscandian chronology. It is in Word 97 >format. Please let me know if you have problems reading it. > >Håkan > > > >Attachment Converted: "c:\eudora\attach\Fenno1.doc" > >_____________________________________________________ >Håkan Grudd grudd@natgeo.su.se >Climate Impacts Research Center >Björkplan 6A, S-98142 Kiruna >and >Dept of Physical Geography >Stockholm University >S-10691 Stockholm >Sweden > >Tel: +46 980 82689, +46 8 164821 >Fax: +46 980 82628