Response to comments on "Reconciliation of the Devils Hole climate record with orbital forcing"

Gina E. Moseley, Yuri V. Dublyansky, R. Lawrence Edwards, Kathleen A. Wendt, Mathieu Pythoud, Pu Zhang, Hai Cheng, Yanbin Lu, Ronny Boch, Christoph Spötl

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)296e
JournalScience
Volume354
Issue number6310
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 21 2016

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This work was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) project no. FP263050 to C.S. and T 710-NBL to G.E.M., and in part by NSF grants 1337693 to R.L.E. and 1602940 to R.L.E. and H.C. This research was conducted under research permit numbers DEVA-2010-SCI-0004 and DEVA-2015-SCI-0006 issued by Death Valley National Park. We thank J. Wallraf for preparation of the thin sections and K. Wilson and R. Freeze for assistance in the field.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2016, American Association for the Advancement of Science. All rights reserved.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Response to comments on "Reconciliation of the Devils Hole climate record with orbital forcing"'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this