We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Reply to: “Comment on ‘High Resolution Paleotemperature Proxy Record for the Last Interglaciation Based on Norwegian Speleothems’ ” by Isaac Winograd and Kenneth Ludwig
Published online by Cambridge University Press:
20 January 2017
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)
References
Gordon, D.Smart, P. L.Ford, D. C.Andrews, J. N.Atkinson, T. C.Rowe, P. J., and Christopher, N. S. J. (1989). Dating of late Pleistocene interglacial and interstadial periods in the United Kingdom from speleothem growth frequency.Quaternary Research31, 14–26.Google Scholar
Lauritzen, S. E. (1995). High-resolution paleotemperature proxy record during the last interglaciation in Norway from speleothems.Quaternary Research43, 133–146.Google Scholar
Mangerud, J. (1989). Correlation of the Eemian and the Weichselian with deep sea oxygen isotope stratigraphy.Quaternary International 3/4, 1–4.Google Scholar
Winograd, I. J.Coplen, T. B.Landwehr, J. M.Riggs, A. C.Ludwig, K. R.Szabo, B.Kolesar, P. T., and Revesz, K. M. (1992). Continuous 500,000- Year climate record from vein calcite in Devils Hole, Nevada.Science258, 255–260.Google Scholar