this is for holding javascript data
Chris Brierley added section_Topography_I_did_have__.tex
over 8 years ago
Commit id: 538fe4dcd85ac52f57472505332043c417ad697b
deletions | additions
diff --git a/section_Topography_I_did_have__.tex b/section_Topography_I_did_have__.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9eab3c0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/section_Topography_I_did_have__.tex
...
\section{Topography}
I did have one question about the scope of the manuscript. It wasn’t clear to whether it aims to serve to just as an experimental description, or will also act as the full description of the boundary condition datasets. I know that the previous experimental design (Haywood 2011) was complemented by a data description paper (Dowsett 2010). Whilst I think that most of datasets are adequately discussed in this manuscript (or prior publications), the topography feels under described. I hope that a separate manuscript is planned to describe all the underlying assumptions for this dataset and highlight the important changes. I would certainly like to see more discussion of the uncertainty inherent in the topography reconstruction. For example, a major change from PRISM3 is the closing of the Bering Strait. I remember seeing a poster at AGU 2014 by Dick Peltier presenting an alternate topography with it closed - this also included the novel scientific components described here. Whilst I’m happy with the reconstruction you present here, I don’t feel there is any acknowledgment that it may have uncertainties.
