http://joannenova.com.au/2013/04/antarctica-gaining-ice-mass-and-is-not-extraordinary-compared-to-800-years-of-data/
I don't know whether there are good enough figures to tell for sure. It wouldn't surprise me if it were gaining ice. The mean mid-summer temperature in Antarctica is -18F, so even if the climate warms a few degrees it will be well below freezing, and if there are greater amounts of water vapor in the atmosphere, then there could be more snowfall and increasing land ice.
Real skeptics would read the actual paper, not the various interpretations from the Denier Echochamber (most if not all by non-scientists).
The original paper does NOT reach the conclusions which Jo Nova reaches and thus Nova's piece and your 'question' here is nothing more but another deliberate attempt to distort the science which you haven't bothered to read (nor understand) for yourself.
The original paper's Conclusions state that 800 years of data showed no statistically significant changes in most of the Antarctica continent. The only measurable changes it found were " a clear increase in accumulation of more than 10 % (> 300 kg m-2 yr ?1) has occurred in high
SMB coastal regions and over the highest part of the East Antarctic ice divide since the 1960s" and as a possible explanation for this increase it mentions "the higher frequency of blocking anticyclones, which increase precipitation at coastal sites and lead to the advection of
moist air at the highest areas, while blowing snow and/or erosion have reduced the SMB at windy sites."
No matter how hard you or Jo Nova wish, nothing in this paper claims that Antarctica is not losing ice volume as a whole.
Nothing is going to sway those certain that the uncertainty in climate science favors the least likely and most scary possibility. All observations point to something bad. No matter what it is there is some explanation as to why they got it wrong, a contradiction isn't a contradiction, someone took the statement out of context, the person pointing out the error isn't a scientist, the ignorance spewed by the scientist in question was not committed to paper, or th ignorant statement made by them fits in the realm of possibilities.
No. Not even close. However some regions of Antarctica likely are and people will cherry pick those regions. Continent wide, and yes it is a continent, net ice volume has been increasing.
Of course you need to pay attention to science and NOT politics to understand this.
you have to look at the land ice as well as the sea ice. The sea ice forms and melts over the yearly cycle, and can be a few meters thick, the land ice has been there for hundreds of thousands of years and is an average of 2 kilometers thick.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarcti...
This will be at least the fourth time I have answered yes and at least the fourth time I have given you this link http://nsidc.org/
To continually ask the same basic question over and over, is rude and really no more than spamming the forum. This type of BS is why we have been getting less legitimate questions from people who need helpful answers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When warmers ask questions and provide posts to skepticalscience or realclimate, denialists usually respond with ad homs. But I will actually look at your link.
All of the graphs in the link go back 800 years and make it very difficult to tell what is happening now.
The claim that Antarctica is losing ice volume is based on data received from the GRACE satellites. http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators#l...
The problem is that GRACE doesn't actually measure ice volume, it measures gravity and according to a couple of studies there are a number of things that can throw theses readings off.
Uncertainty in ocean mass trends from GRACE
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.11...
Ramillien et al. (2006)
http://www.co2science.org/articles/V9/N5...
We can SEE ice increasing at the surface, in fact it just set an all time record this month (Oct. 2013).
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/s_stddev_timeseries1.png
I think Joanne Codling is really hot until she talks or writes (her stage name is Joanne Nova - she has a basic microbiology degree but is paid by the Heartland Institute to regurgitate their handouts. Her husband though is a REAL self proclaimed rocket scientist, sadly overlooked by NASA)
However , if I order gnocchi with Gorgonzola sauce I dont expect it is improved if someone else chews it first.
I know its against your principles but have a go , this once , to read the actual science - rather than Jo's selective mastication. See what it tastes like yourself - I did
How dare you bring in TSI! It's as innocent as CO2 is. Does TSI need a lawyer too?
I'm agreeing with pegminer.
The continued balancing act of the entire climate will continue, but it will continue on its own terms and will have nothing to do with how humans treat it. It's too big for humans to have a catastrophic effect. Any climate change claimed to be caused by humans is completely false. Temperature change is not as drastic as is claimed and never will be.
this article says no.
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/04/antarctica-gaining-ice-mass-and-is-not-extraordinary-compared-to-800-years-of-data/
that's the interpretation of the author of The Skeptic's Handbook, not the actual paper. The fact that it refers to WUWT makes it suspicious. Read the original paper.
NASA says mass is decreasing
As the ocean water is warming up(even 2 degrees) ice melts on both poles. It is happening all over.
After brushing aside the water vapour that was blocking my view, I could see pegminer gave a somewhat reasonable answer. Perhaps some alarmists still have a tenuous grip on reality.
I think Joanne Codling is really hot until she talks or writes (her stage name is Joanne Nova - she has a basic microbiology degree but is paid by the Heartland Institute to regurgitate their handouts. Her husband though is a REAL self proclaimed rocket scientist, sadly overlooked by NASA)
However , if I order gnocchi with Gorgonzola sauce I dont expect it is improved if someone else chews it first.
I know its against your principles but have a go , this once , to read the actual science - rather than Jo's selective mastication. See what it tastes like yourself - I did
How dare you bring in TSI! It's as innocent as CO2 is. Does TSI need a lawyer too?
I'm agreeing with pegminer.
The continued balancing act of the entire climate will continue, but it will continue on its own terms and will have nothing to do with how humans treat it. It's too big for humans to have a catastrophic effect. Any climate change claimed to be caused by humans is completely false. Temperature change is not as drastic as is claimed and never will be.
this article says no.
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/04/antarctica-gaining-ice-mass-and-is-not-extraordinary-compared-to-800-years-of-data/
that's the interpretation of the author of The Skeptic's Handbook, not the actual paper. The fact that it refers to WUWT makes it suspicious. Read the original paper.
NASA says mass is decreasing
As the ocean water is warming up(even 2 degrees) ice melts on both poles. It is happening all over.
After brushing aside the water vapour that was blocking my view, I could see pegminer gave a somewhat reasonable answer. Perhaps some alarmists still have a tenuous grip on reality.
