Dear Authors,

Two of the Reviewers raise several comments on your manuscript. In particular, Reviewer #1, which had also reviewed your previous submission, still raises a number of methodological concerns. I appreciated the detailed replies that you provided to these concerns, and I believe that they can be satisfactorily addressed in a revised version of the manuscript. I would particularly encourage you to consider whether some of the detailed statistical analyses that you provided in the replies could be included as a supplement and briefly referred to in the main text. When you provide the revised manuscript, please also update your replies to help the Reviewers understand which changes, if any, you have implemented in your manuscript as a result of their comments.
Finally, I would envourage you to add a "code availability" section in your manuscript.

Best Regards,
Gabriele Messori

Dear Authors,

All Reviewers recognise that you have addressed their concerns and that the manuscript has significantly improved. The only remaining point of substance, beyond a technical correction suggested by Reviewer #3, is a query from Reviewer #1 on the way in which you quantify sampling error. Please respond carefully to this comment, either by updating your approach if you believe that this is needed, or by providing a detailed and convincing argument of why your estimation procedure is robust (possibly demonstrating this with synthetic or example data), if you believe that the Reviewer's reasoning is not correct.

Best Regards,
Gabriele Messori

Dear Authors,

I am pleased to accept your manuscript for publication in Earth System Dynamics. I appreciate that this manuscript, in its two iterations, has gone through multiple rounds of review before acceptance, and would like to thank you for conducting an overall constructive exchange with the Reviewers.

Best Regards,
Gabriele Messori