Reply to "Comment on 'A crustal thickness map of Africa derived from a global gravity field model using Euler deconvolution"'

M. van der Meijde, Andrew Arnold Nyblade

Research output: Contribution to journalLetter

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

We address the comment by Reid et al. on our paper (2011, Geophys. J. Int., 187). In this reply we clarify details about the data processing, modelling and interpretation showing, counter to the claims by Reid et al., that the effects of using free air gravity data are not 'deleterious', and that the choices of modelling parameters are not 'grievous'. The processing steps could have been explained in greater detail, and a lack of clarity about them underpins many of the issues raised. We find little scientific justification in the arguments presented by Reid et al. to revise either the crustal thickness estimates presented in our paper, or the reported uncertainty (±5 km) of those estimates.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)96-99
Number of pages4
JournalGeophysical Journal International
Volume196
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2013

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Geophysics
  • Geochemistry and Petrology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Reply to "Comment on 'A crustal thickness map of Africa derived from a global gravity field model using Euler deconvolution"''. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this