Please see attached file

Based on existing data sets - the LR04 stack and the caloric summer half year insolation - and multiple linear regression models, this study concludes that (1) the interglacial intensity of the last 800 kyr depends on the strength of the previous glacial and summer insolation at high latitudes in both hemispheres, (2) the MBE can be explained by the larger amplitude of obliquity cycles after 430 kyr, and (3) the glacial intensity depends on the strength of the previous interglacial, the time elapsed from it and the evolution of boreal summer insolation. It provides some interesting ideas in explaining the glacial and interglacial intensity. However, I have several major concerns on the methodology used in this study which prevent me to be convinced of the conclusions. Hope the authors will provide more explanations and clarifications. 

Specific comments and questions: 

1.    The authors use the LR04 stack as a reference and define the glacial and interglacial intensity by using the delta 18O max and min. In their linear regression models, summer insolation is involved in predicting the delta 18O max and min. As the LR04 stack is orbitally tuned, I wonder to which extent the results are influenced by circular reasoning and whether the comparison between different data sets in Fig2 makes sense.

2.    CO2 is an important factor in the climate system, but it is not considered in the regression models in predicting the glacial and interglacial intensity.

3.    There are many assumptions made artificially without clear physical meaning. This makes the study appear more like a mathematical game. For example, what is the physical meaning of averaging the 65N and 65S summer insolation, why the threshold value 5.735 GJm-2 is chosen, what is its physical meaning,  what is the reasoning of the assumptions on the relation between delta 18O min and mas (line 174-176; line 132).

4.    The authors attribute the MBE in the LR04 stack to the amplitude change of obliquity, but the physical mechanism is not clear. Moreover, obliquity has a periodicity of 40 kyr, but the interglacial peaks are separated by ~100 kyr. It is unclear to me how the two could be linked. There is also MBE in the interglacial CO2 concentration. I wonder why CO2 is not mentioned in explaining the MBE.

5.    Can the regression models based on the last 800kyr data explain the glacial and interglacial intensity before 800kyr?

6.    There is no real conclusion section.