Response to reviewer 1 comments

Abstract

We thank the reviewer for their positive and helpful comments on our manuscript. 1) As the reviewer points out, the pollen-based reconstructions and the climate model simulations underpinning our reconstruction are in the public domain, and the data assimilation methodology is described in detail in another publication. The general approach used for the CO2 corrections, which the reviewer describes as a significant contribution, was published in Prentice et al. (2017) -although we provide the equations for the implementation of this approach in the current paper in Appendix 1. Therefore, the new results in this paper are indeed the global maps of reconstructed climate variables. These data are archived and will be made publicly available -however, we C1 CPD Interactive commentPrinter-friendly version Discussion paper

Critical University Studies

“…While we appreciate their efforts to bring conversations about past and ongoing colonialism to the center of anthropology, Gupta & Stoolman maintain attachments to anthropology and to the American university that make them ironically more in agreement with their detractors than with the decolonial tradition of scholarship in anthropology, especially from Indigenous and Black diasporic scholars. This scholarship foregrounds the fact that colonialism is the condition of possibility for anthropology in the first place and highlights the ongoing settler logics of both the university and the discipline (Harrison 1997a;Simpson 2014Simpson , 2018Todd 2016). Although Gupta & Stoolman provide a long list of references to scholars who have made decolonial interventions into the discipline, the recourse to the speculative rather than deep engagement with this scholarship also ends up rehearsing normative genealogies of the canon and a call to "respect the elders."…”