Comparison of the PaleoMIST 1.0 ice sheet margins, ice sheet and paleo-topography reconstruction with paleo sea level indicators

These reports were generated using the Global Archive of Paleo Sea Level Indicators and Proxies (GAPSLIP).
The sea level data, plus the scripts used generate the report, can be found on Github:

https://github.com/evangowan/paleo_sea_level

In this package, there are three reports, each of which have six model runs that are compared with the
standard PaleoMIST 1.0 ice sheet margins, ice sheet and paleo-topography reconstruction. In contrast to
previous versions of this report, the standard version is the MIS 3 scenario where Hudson Bay remains ice
covered. All models have been computed at 500 year resolution by linearly interpolating the ice load
between time steps. This was done because the original 2500 year resolution overestimates the loading effect
in near field regions due to the fact that SELEN uses a heaviside function to represent the load.

The first document (report1) shows a comparison of the response using a variety of lower mantle viscosity
values. The second document (report2) compares the standard PaleoMIST 1.0, the alternate reconstruction
with an ice free Hudson Bay in MIS 3 (in prior versions of this report, this was the default) a version
with Antarctica set to be in its present configuration at 5000 years ago, ICE-6G, and PaleoMIST with
three other commonly used Earth models. The third document (report3) includes several extra models
where the thickness of the Greenland Ice Sheet was increased, and the standard PaleoMIST with different
lithosphere thickness values.

I have also included the explicitly calculated sea level for all the models displayed in these
reports in a zip file called "calculated_sea_level.zip". You can place the files in the
folder "latex/calculated_sea_level" after you download the Git repository.

Version 2.0: I have included data from Greenland and Australia. I have changed the default version of PaleoMIST
to be the MIS 3 ice covered Hudson Bay scenario, which I think is more likely. I have changed some of the models
in the second report (as listed above) and included a third report with alternative Greenland models.