This is the problem with what are often called «curve - fitting» standardisation methods —
they remove differences in mean growth rate between tree cores even if the difference arises from climate changes that we are trying to reconstruct.
Not exact matches
Like many first - time homebuyers, the Stoodleys had a condition of pending finance approval, something they weren't comfortable
removing even though
in this market that one condition often
meant the
difference between getting a house and losing one.
The comparison of fast and slow growing trees is somewhat unfair
in the light of the definition of growth rate
in terms of «
mean ring increment» and the RCS presumption that there are sufficient trees for the averaging process to
remove differences.
Figure 3: Percentage
difference in monthly
mean surface ozone concentrations
in March, between the run
in which spring and summer sea ice is
removed («extreme scenario») and the run
in which no perturbations were applied.
Figure 2: Percentage
difference in monthly
mean surface OH concentrations
in August, between the run
in which late - summer sea ice is
removed («realistic scenario») and the run
in which no perturbations were applied.