Let us look at the heated responses.
At too the slanders.
Even at the idea that climate changers, such as me are?
Well wrong, but also idiots, victims of con men, very nearly some say, evil.
Now this may fall on deaf ears, but one day, without doubt, we will all find out who is right who is wrong.
Why, tell me, would ANYONE want to deceive the world about climate change.
And for Conservative deniers, are you aware? your party has publicly agreed man, in part is bringing about climate change.
Self assurance in some hands is destructive.
But only of that persons own standing.

Hasbeen,

The total mass of ice in Antarctica is decreasing, so there has been no gain of ice in Antarctica.

The rate of loss is increasing annually.

You're getting confused with the amount of sea-ice, which is increasing despite warmer oceans, compared to total ice mass (land + sea ice) which is decreasing. Perhaps because the land ice is thinning and spreading out to the seas, where it will thin and melt further in the warmer waters.

So, once again you only have half the story. Yet you call me simple.

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/earth20110308.html
http://www.skepticalscience.com/antarctica-gaining-ice-intermediate.ht

Anthony and TCM, for some reason you place the superior moral compass in the abode of the scientist. Scientists, like the society deemed morally superior medicos have the same feet of clay that the general population have. Would and do they take money for accumulating data and making projections that favour their benefactors case,yes particularly when it comes to the science of weather, nd they always have the terms of reference to fall back on should it fall in a heap. I expect they justify it morally as a fore warned is fore armed service and given we are talking projections with a raft of variants that comprise the whole it is easy for them to justify the morality of giving the man what he wants to hear.

We have decent global weather stats going back a century or so, before that we rely on chroniclers of extra ordinary events and astronomer’s logs believe it or not, they charted the weather because it affected their viewing. We also have the geological record and that shows warming and cooling is not new, nor is the variation in atmospheric CO2, add solar activity to the equation and the future is anyone’s guess. Why has the debate on the weather warming formed a "currency" to pollute, which is being paid by the consumer and not the polluter, because the polluter is the Carbon abatement movement. That any one could believe the likes of Gore astounds me, pick an intellect at least.

TCM:>>You're getting confused with the amount of sea-ice, which is increasing despite warmer oceans, compared to total ice mass (land + sea ice) which is decreasing. Perhaps because the land ice is thinning and spreading out to the seas, where it will thin and melt further in the warmer waters.<<

Thank you TCM, that explains everything, the warmer it gets the more it freezes, and it has wanderlust this hot ice, spreading out to even warmer waters, the same but warmer water that aided and abetted its formation in the first place, but wait, this time it will melt you say, bloody physics changing the rules again.

Endorsing this link is probably the only thing I am entitled to at this point in the the discussion, But Anthonyve is a winner on points for mine.

http://www.ted.com/talks/rob_dunbar.html

To throw a spanner in the works, cope with this one, CO2 skeptics.

Oh dear, skeptical scientist does excatly what the 'skeptics' wanted a skeptical scientist to do, examine the data and check and control for 'heat island effects', which was one of things the skeptics were crowing about and publish the full analysis so that everyone can see how it was done. You do realise that he did exactly what Watts and crew wanted him to do, right?

And guess what: the data said what the 'other' scientists said it did.

...and many of you guys still don't believe it. Some even want to disown Muller and say he was never a 'skeptic'. Even Watts has his own hypocriticisms.

I could have laid bets on that