Ditto to Glyphs answer, you keep asking the same question and ignoring the real answers and going with some denier tripe.
Why would we need try explain it, when you already did "due to cooling surface air temps" as deniers usually do you left out this is only Antarctic (sea) ice, the cooling surface temperatures are due to the melt coming from Antarctic glaciers and katabatic winds (I'm sure I've already explained this to you several times), fresh water lowers (slightly) the salinity of coastal waters, add to that katabatic winds and you can have an increase in sea ice because surface conditions are cooler, Which a number of scientists predicted might happen nearly 2 decades ago.
Sea ice does not play a part in sea level rise, glacial ice certainly does, glacial ice is certainly losing mass and that mass is going into the sea.
http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators#l...
The effect varies over the year if you had actually read (and understood the paper you posted) affected by seasonal conditions and the fact most Antarctic sea ice melts completely each summer and reforms each winter, unlike Arctic ice that lasts (or did) much longer, this is why Arctic ice has a thicker overall average ~2m where Antarctica's is only ~1m.
I mean I see why you try to pretend this is all Antarctic ice rather than just sea ice, it's an old and rather tired denier trick, but what Antarctic glaciers are doing is now well known, and they are certainly not expanding.
You can expect Antarctic ice to grow with global warming, because more water will evaporate and fall on the continent, while it is too cold for ice to melt there.
The truth is that growing antarctic sea ice doesn't mean a thing because antarctica is losing ice pack, that's the important part and that's what will cause sea levels to rise. Personally I think we need to build new roads in the US that will allow electric cars to draw energy directly from the roads. Then have all new cars built to take advantage of those new roads.
How can we power such a road network?? We do it by building a bunch of liquid fluoride thorium reactors (LFTR) they are 100% safe and they can also be used to dispose of existing nuclear waste. Not only that, but think of all the new jobs that would be created to build those roads, new power plants and new cars that will take advantage of the roads.
Please do not complain about nuclear power here, it's impossible for an LFTR to melt down, they don't require cooling pools for spent fuel and thorium is one of the most abundant substances on the earth. Combine that with the fact that an LFTR can be used to dispose of nuclear waste and its a win win situation for everyone.
You apparently did not read the study you linked. You need to read past the abstract.
We will let that study explain what the "alarmist" have not explained to you.
"Steig et al. (2009) showed that continent-wide average near-surface temperature in the Antarctica has a positive trend over the past 50 years. Zhang (2007) also pointed out that Antarctic sea ice is increasing under warm atmospheric and oceanic conditions. Ocean–ice coupled model suggested the ice melting from ocean heat flux is decreased under warm atmospheric and oceanic conditions. This can explain why Antarctic sea ice has an increased trend under warm conditions."
Further explanation - http://www.popsci.com/science/article/20... - Further support for this - http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Lat...
******
Kano, I agree. How models are used and why one model has different results than the other models can be a bit perplexing. We need to consider that if all models used the same data and looked at the same things then all the models would show the same results in their runs. This is precisely why different models are used. They use different data and look at different things. The study's methodology showed that the team chose to use the GISS model because it was the closet to the observations made to study what they were trying to discover in their study. When you read the Summary of the study it is noted that more testing in this area needed to be made and this is why I linked two later studies that showed the same results as the first study. There were follow up studies made on this study and these studies verified what the first study thought it was seeing in their observations. This is a part of the peer review process.
It could be a lot worse.
Hey Dook might be growing!
(NB No offence to either party intended!)
EDIT: "All you people that deny global warming should be out purchasing all the coastal property you can get your hands on."
You mean like Al? "Al Gore bought a $4M condo feet from ocean in Fisherman’s Wharf, San Fransisco (sic) ..."
Antarctica is losing ice volume yearly, even though eastern ice extent grows in winter.
How do you hold your head up given the drivel you come up with http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/...
Definitely not the first time I have responded to you explaining the ice loss from under water.
All you people that deny global warming should be out purchasing all the coastal property you can get your hands on.
Cherry picking by nutters like you, can safely be ignored
gvjgjvgjvjhjhbhj
due to cooling surface air temps a new study shows http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/docs/Shu_etal_2012.pdf
Concentration is growing too http://nsidc.org/cgi-bin/bist/bist.pl?annot=1&legend=1&scale=100&tab_cols=2&tab_rows=2&config=seaice_index&submit=Refresh&mo0=07&hemis0=S&img0=anom&mo1=07&hemis1=S&img1=conc&year0=2013&year1=2012
We might have a new record this year, how do alarmists explain this
