Dear authors,

I have checked your responses to the reviewers' comment. In general, I am satisfied with your responses and related changes. However, there is one remaining issue that I would like you to give some attention:
Referee no. 2 has pointed to the definition of precision and accuracy in your paper. I your reply, you are not fully consistent. On page 12 of your reply, you provide a definition of precision and accuracy: "We use standard definitions of accuracy and precision. (i) high accuracy is determined by the narrowness of the spread of repeated measurements relative to the underlying true value. (ii)
high precision is determined by the narrowness of repeated measurements with respect to a measure of their central value such as the mean or median." I understand that what you call accuracy is the combination of precision and bias (small bias AND small spread provides good accuracy). Later on, however, in your reply and in the manuscript, you use "bias" alone and "accuracy" synonymously (Page 12, bottom: "The accuracy (bias) of the reanalysis temperatures ...". Therefore I suggest that you start your paper with a clear and careful definition of the terms accuracy and precision as used in the paper, and stick with this definition throughout the paper.

Thank you!
Kind regards,
Gabriele Stiller

Dear Alyn, dear Michelle,

thank you for taking my comments into account. I find that your paper is now ready for final publication. Almost - there is still one tiny issue: in the conclusion section, first sentence, you still talk about "accuracy and precision" - shouldn't this be "bias and precision" (according to you definition provided earlier)? Please check for this and correct if necessary during the proof reading phase.
Congratulations to a very nice and interesting paper!

Kind regards,
Gabi Stiller