From: Tim Osborn <t.osborn@uea.ac.uk>
To: Jason E Smerdon <jsmerdon@umich.edu>
Subject: Re: SH figure for IPCC AR4
Date: Tue Aug  9 14:14:43 2005
Cc: Henry Pollack <hpollack@umich.edu>, Keith Briffa <k.briffa@uea.ac.uk>, Eystein Jansen <eystein.jansen@geo.uib.no>, Jonathan Overpeck <jto@u.arizona.edu>

   Thanks for the comments Jason/Henry.  Just wanted to let you know that I've dropped the
   uncertainty ranges to be consistent with the other records and also cut the borehole series
   at the median sampling dates.
   Cheers
   Tim
   At 16:45 04/08/2005, Jason E Smerdon wrote:

     Hi Tim,
     Henry and I apologize for not being available the last few days.  Henry has been out of
     town and I have been in the midst of moving to New York. Nevertheless, we had the chance
     to cross paths today and discuss the figure and caption.  We hope it is not too late to
     add our two cents.
     We agree that the uncertainties on the borehole curves should be removed to make the
     display more consistent.  We have also decided that it would be best to truncate the
     borehole curves at their median logging dates. For Australia and Africa those years are
     1972 and 1986, respectively.  If you wish to discuss the sampling densities, the total
     number of boreholes in Australia and Africa are 57 and 92, respectively.  The SH has a
     total of 165 holes, compared to 695 in the NH.
     Let us know if you need anything else.  I hope this has not arrived too late and good
     luck with everything.
     Best Regards,
     Jason