File talk:Epica-vostok-grip-40kyr.png
General stuff[edit]
Would be good to have some units and axis labels on each axis. It would also be good to know (for those inexperienced of us) which language this was written in. cheers --110.32.179.44 (talk) 23:29, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
- The x-axis is in years. The y-axis is in delta-O-18. As for what it means, Proxy_(climate)#Water_isotopes_and_temperature_reconstruction and / or Paleothermometer#.CE.B418O may help William M. Connolley (talk) 23:41, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Deuterium versus Oxygen Isotope[edit]
The labelling of the y-axis is wrong: Only GRIP is Oxygen Isotope, while the other 2 are Deuterium – as found by Robert Clemenzi. 217.237.77.87 (talk) 01:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
- You're right. However... it doesn't much matter. d-O-18 and d-D closely resemble each other (http://www.iceandclimate.nbi.ku.dk/publications/papers/pdfs/242.pdf/) William M. Connolley (talk) 09:53, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
- Two out of three are deuterium, not oxygen. Plus, oxygen looks, well, how to put it, a tad bit different on visual inspection on this time-scale. I'd say it does matter, as the image is an misrepresentation of the data it portrays. Maybe it does not matter much, but an image closer to reality (a caption which would mention both types of proxies, or even better two separate graphs in one image) would be helpful for people I'd imagine. I for one would not have to ask myself: "Well, if I check, how many more errors that don't matter 'much' are there here?" And secondly, people tend to use information from wikipedia for their work, their school projects, their presentations – let's give them correct information. I would say it would mater for them, and for some it could actually matter much. 217.237.64.49 (talk) 11:21, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
- Plus, oxygen looks, well, how to put it, a tad bit different on visual inspection on this time-scale? [citation needed]. As for the rest:
feel free to fix it. I've cut of the title, and noted the differing quantities in the description. You could have done the same William M. Connolley (talk) 12:13, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
- Plus, oxygen looks, well, how to put it, a tad bit different on visual inspection on this time-scale? [citation needed]. As for the rest:
- Two out of three are deuterium, not oxygen. Plus, oxygen looks, well, how to put it, a tad bit different on visual inspection on this time-scale. I'd say it does matter, as the image is an misrepresentation of the data it portrays. Maybe it does not matter much, but an image closer to reality (a caption which would mention both types of proxies, or even better two separate graphs in one image) would be helpful for people I'd imagine. I for one would not have to ask myself: "Well, if I check, how many more errors that don't matter 'much' are there here?" And secondly, people tend to use information from wikipedia for their work, their school projects, their presentations – let's give them correct information. I would say it would mater for them, and for some it could actually matter much. 217.237.64.49 (talk) 11:21, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
