After carefully re-reading the paper and examining the reviewer’s comments and author responses, I have come to the conclusion that this is an interesting and ultimately relevant paper for CP. However, more work in required before it can be considered for publication. In a broad sense I agree with the criticisms of both reviewers. If this is a paper about the Eocene it needs to be convincing and that comes hand in hand with a more deliberate connection with the geological data (particularly palaeobotanical data). Otherwise this could simply have been an idealised modelling study with no direct connection to the Eocene necessary.

I also agree with reviewer 2 that this work needs to be better placed into the context of the large amount of climate modelling work on the Eocene already published, which is not cited. The reviewers’ criticisms and suggestions for further analyses/simulation appear reasonable.

Overall I think the changes will result in a better product, and a product that would be suitable for CP.