Comments on: Naurzbaev http://climateaudit.org/2005/10/05/naurzbaev/ by Steve McIntyre Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:32:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Medieval Treeline in Finland « Climate Audit http://climateaudit.org/2005/10/05/naurzbaev/#comment-244513 Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:41:50 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=394#comment-244513 [...] and Greenland, but extend to the Sierra Nevadas (117 W), Sweden, Finland, Polar Urals (65 E) and a Siberian transect (90-100E). I’ll add a comment on Chinese proxies of this type. Kultti et al. also consider [...]

]]> By: Ashby http://climateaudit.org/2005/10/05/naurzbaev/#comment-38309 Fri, 09 Jun 2006 03:51:59 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=394#comment-38309 Regarding comment 14:

I’ve been mentioning various sites in the western U.S. where there’s subfossil wood. Why wouldn’t someone do transects and get some nice clean results similar to Naurzbaev?

Sounds like fun! Road trip & working vacation in one! Maybe enough of the readers here would be willing to undergo core-sampling/collection training to set up an expedition? I’m sure TCO has the energy to collect at least 1000 cores/day!

I live in Southern California. I’ve gone hiking in some very rugged areas (King’s Canyon, triple continental divide, areas around Mammoth Mountain, etc.) and recall seeing many stumps above the current tree lines. I think it would be a blast to get the proper training, grab a high quality GPS & altimeter and go off trail to take some samples at varying altitudes!

I’d want to make sure I did it properly so as not to damage any currently viable trees, etc..

Anyone have any advice on getting the training/tools and desirable target areas? Anyone want a nice set of samples to work with?

Feel free to email me. –>A s h by A t m a c dot c om (wonky spacing to prevent spam)

Ashby

p.s. I’m currently taking some time off work to go paint landscapes, so now would be a good time to do this. :-)

(I’ll try to submit again. Looks like I may have been spam grabbed.)

]]> By: Ashby http://climateaudit.org/2005/10/05/naurzbaev/#comment-38308 Fri, 09 Jun 2006 03:36:40 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=394#comment-38308 Regarding comment 14:

I’ve been mentioning various sites in the western U.S. where there’s subfossil wood. Why wouldn’t someone do transects and get some nice clean results similar to Naurzbaev?

Sounds like fun! Road trip & working vacation in one! Maybe enough of the readers here would be willing to undergo core-sampling/collection training to set up an expedition? I’m sure TCO has the energy to collect at least 1000 cores/day!

I’ve been mentioning various sites in the western U.S. where there’s subfossil wood. Why wouldn’t someone do transects and get some nice clean results similar to Naurzbaev?

I live in Southern California. I’ve gone hiking in some very rugged areas (King’s Canyon, triple continental divide, areas around Mammoth Mountain, etc.) and recall seeing many stumps above the current tree lines. I think it would be a blast to get the proper training, grab a high quality GPS & altimeter and go off trail to take some samples at varying altitudes!

I’d want to make sure I did it properly so as not to damage any currently viable trees, etc..

Anyone have any advice on getting the training/tools and desirable target areas? Anyone want a nice set of samples to work with?

Feel free to email me. –>A s h by A t m a c dot c om (wonky spacing to prevent spam)

Ashby

p.s. I’m currently taking some time off work to go paint landscapes, so now would be a good time to do this. :-)

]]> By: TCO http://climateaudit.org/2005/10/05/naurzbaev/#comment-38307 Thu, 04 May 2006 14:20:21 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=394#comment-38307 Here is a species where altitude does correlate negatively with RW, no?

]]> By: TCO http://climateaudit.org/2005/10/05/naurzbaev/#comment-38306 Mon, 02 Jan 2006 04:37:29 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=394#comment-38306 Yeah…you’ve said that before. It may have some use I guess although there would be some issue with time required for forest to move.

Now…how about my question 21 (which I guess is affected by your most recent post…hehe).

]]> By: Steve McIntyre http://climateaudit.org/2005/10/05/naurzbaev/#comment-38305 Mon, 02 Jan 2006 04:34:19 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=394#comment-38305 I’m quite interested in tree line changes, which intuitively can be connected directly to climate. I’ve been collecting information off and on. I don’t see why this wouldn’t be as useful a proxy as (say) coldwater diatom % offshore Oman.

]]> By: TCO http://climateaudit.org/2005/10/05/naurzbaev/#comment-38304 Mon, 02 Jan 2006 03:51:19 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=394#comment-38304 So does a paper like this make you think that it’s possible to find reasonable proxies, Steve? Is altitude, lattitude, growth correction sufficient to get a proxy with some use?

]]> By: TCO http://climateaudit.org/2005/10/05/naurzbaev/#comment-38303 Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:28:25 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=394#comment-38303 I know what they mean. I was commenting on a chart mixing the terms. Pick one or the other was my point.

]]> By: Dave Dardinger http://climateaudit.org/2005/10/05/naurzbaev/#comment-38302 Mon, 10 Oct 2005 13:35:45 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=394#comment-38302 And actually I believe the present meaning in the literature of BC is Before Common era and to use CE instead of AD. The dechristianization of terminology is rather silly, IMO as it doesn’t apply to any other religion. At least since the debacle of the French Revolution I don’t believe there’s been a tendency to try replacing the names of the days of the week because of their originally religious origins. [Thursday = Thor's day; Wednesday = Woden's day etc.]

]]> By: Paul Gosling http://climateaudit.org/2005/10/05/naurzbaev/#comment-38301 Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:51:23 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=394#comment-38301 Actually BP means before 1950. Its all to do with carbon dating.

]]>