Right yeah, I quoted a study in a big list which included one from 2005 so I'm suddenly out of date?
Who said anything about logarithmic ice loss? I said warming caused by climate change is a logarithmic effect. You are literally making up things for me to argue now. At this point, you're not acting in good faith. To be honest, you haven't been doing since you waded in and stated that scientific consensus of "we know" is somehow wrong because SOME LoSUs of SOME forcings are low. Every time I say something that's explanational to what I'm saying, like I did with sea ice before, you ignore it. Even if it shows you that you are wrong and have a narrow minded view on things like I did with polynias. You call me an extremist because I work from scientific consensus that climate change is a well known and understood problem and when I point to this consensus you argue semantics.
You tell me exactly how your idea of "we don't know" is relevant when the consensus says that we do know. You have failed to explain this also. Every major scientific institute in the world takes a positive or non-committal stance on this. Nearly all of those take a positive stance. You have yet to explain to me why these are incorrect. More to the point, you've taken tiny, tiny pieces of an overall picture and tried to make a workable framework out of it which is just wrong in climatology. Climate isn't uniform or localised. I would have thought that this is the first thing that you would have learnt about the subject.
In answer to your questions:
Please state a position on whether you think there is ice loss overall from the Antarctic? and also the East Antarctic?
Yes, there is overall ice loss in Antarctica. Considering you want 2012 estimates and used NASA, here's one from about three weeks ago from the same source:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Grace/news/grace20121129.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/Grace ... 21129.html</a>
Here's the ice mass from various models up to 2012
[bigimg]http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/709631main_earth20121129b-946.jpg[/bigimg]
Here's the relevant quote
This rate of ice sheet losses falls within the range reported in 2007 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The spread of estimates in the 2007 IPCC report was so broad, however, it was not clear whether Antarctica was growing or shrinking. The new estimates, which are more than twice as accurate because of the inclusion of more satellite data, confirm both Antarctica and Greenland are losing ice. Combined, melting of these ice sheets contributed 0.44 inches (11.1 millimeters) to global sea levels since 1992. This accounts for one-fifth of all sea level rise over the 20-year survey period. The remainder is caused by the thermal expansion of the warming ocean, melting of mountain glaciers and small Arctic ice caps, and groundwater mining.
As I say, I don't think you are posting in good faith, you are arguing against the huge scientific consensus and you have shown to have a lacking understanding in several places. Consider this my last interaction with you in this thread.
Also, from that AR5 link:
There is high confidence that the Antarctic Ice Sheet is currently losing mass. The average ice loss from Antarctica was 65 [32 to 98] Gt yr over the period 1993–2010, and 112 [54 to 170] Gt yr over the period 2005–2010. The largest ice losses from Antarctica have occurred on the northern Antarctic Peninsula and from the Amundsen Sea sector of West Antarctica. In the last two decades, East Antarctica is likely to have experienced a small gain in mass.
I wouldn't put much stock in this as it hasn't gone through the full peer review process but whatever
