You fail to address the point that your paper looks at data up to 2008, mine looks at data up to 2011.<quoted text>
Again, I guess now NASA is a denier blog and the paper you posted was from a denier blog.
I got all my information from NASA on this one. Both my paper and your paper came from NASA. The difference between you and me is that I actually read what you post and what I post.
My paper was from NASA ICEsat showing Anartica ice mass increasing. Your paper was from NASA showing Anartica ice mass decreasing
Science moves on; denial doesn't
You also fail to address the point that your paper clearly states that the extra snowfall is due to *warming*.