Referee #2 has indicated that there are still some issues in your paper that need some attention.

I ask you that you go through the indicated points in the second report by referee#2 and please review accordingly or justify your point of view. There is one point that the reviewer makes, and I agree with him, that you should include your answer to the reviewer question in the manuscript so that other readers will be able to profit from the interactions that have been going on.

Regarding the statistical tests... we would like to seen something like the student´s t test, for example to show there is a signifficant difference between the two years.
There are several instances that need clarification and more detail, so please provide this in your manuscript.

The authors have introduced clarifications of several points addressed by the reviewers and the manuscript is now in an almost final form for publication.
One point that still requires some clarification is regarding the text introduce in lines 200-201: “Also, a significant test (Test t-Student) was applied to assess the significance of the correlation coefficients amongst the remote sensors compared to the RS (Tables S1 to S4 in the Supplement).” The tables S1-S4 do not have a complete label that allows the reader to understand the numbers and does not indicate what numbers are significant. Please provide a complete table caption, with p-value, degrees of freedom, etc. Also, the manuscript does not provide any comment on the results in Table S1-S4, regarding the significance of the correlations.