Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Response to comments on "reconciliation of the Devils Hole climate record with orbital forcing"||Authors:||Moseley, Gina E.
Dublyansky, Yuri V.
Edwards, R. Lawrence
Wendt, Kathleen A.
|Keywords:||Engineering::Environmental engineering||Issue Date:||2016||Source:||Moseley, G. E., Dublyansky, Y. V., Edwards, R. L., Wendt, K. A., Pythoud, M., Zhang, P., . . . Spötl, C. (2016). Response to comments on “reconciliation of the Devils Hole climate record with orbital forcing”. Science, 354(6310), 296e-. doi:10.1126/science.aaf8679||Journal:||Science||Abstract:||Winograd and Coplen question the thorium-230 distribution model proposed to explain the age bias observed with increasing depth during Termination II. We have evaluated both criticisms and find that all samples display virtually identical fabrics, argue that the modern setting is not analogous to the conditions during Termination II, and reiterate the robustness of our age models. Our conclusions remain unchanged.||URI:||https://hdl.handle.net/10356/146602||ISSN:||0036-8075||DOI:||10.1126/science.aaf8679||Rights:||© 2016 American Association for the Advancement of Science. All rights reserved.||Fulltext Permission:||none||Fulltext Availability:||No Fulltext|
|Appears in Collections:||EOS Journal Articles|
Updated on Jan 24, 2022
Items in DR-NTU are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.