Just a moment...if the hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica is combatting global warming, would this now be viewed as a good thing and render the Montreal Protocol redundant? Also, if the increase in size of the Antarctic sea ice proves that the loss of sea ice has doubled since 2003, then perhaps any coming decrease in size of the Antarctic sea ice in future will be viewed as having halved the loss of sea ice since 2009...and render the Kyoto Protocol redundant...

It should be of great concern to all Kiwis that their taxes are being spent on sending "scientists" on expensive overseas trips to inform us that global warming makes antartica larger. Their findings state that the sea ice shrinks in summer and expands in winter and water which melts from ice is cold. Its hard to understand why Dr Naish is so excited about these sort of revelations as they have been common knowledge for centuries.

The article also states that Arctic ice shrunk by 4% of 500,000 sq km, and later states that the area of Arctic ice is 15,000,00 sq km. I wonder how much that information cost us!

People who make statements such as "the melted water protects the ice sheets from the warming effects of climate change", really need to be aware that in order for this to make any sense at all, they need to provide evidence that there are any "warming effects". As far as we can ascertain, there is no such evidence.

By the way, I think the headline of this article is misleading. Realists (sceptics) primarily question the bizarre belief that increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide is causing, or will cause, dangerous global warming. Focus on the "why", not the "what". So even if the reported studies proved what they purport to prove, they still don't "debunk" anything.

The area of Antarctica that is melting is very small, there has been a 20% increase in ice volume overall, the arctic sea ice is not disappearing either, sea ice extent is steady as usual if even just a little thicker because this last northern winter has seen summer ice not melting refreeze again, we have been cooling world wide for most of this new century, their has been no warming globally since 1998. Melts in the summer freezes in the winter, the climate always changes and always has. To be a scientist is to be a skeptic isn't it? Don't worry every one I'm sure a tax on all C02 emissions will make the climate stay completely steady right down the line, wow, just think about how easy forecasting will become without climate change.

"The research team says the discovery further debunks the claims of sceptics who have pointed to the continent's growth as evidence against global warming."

Nice to see unbiased scientific reporting, the team clearly went down there with the clear objective to disprove global warming skeptics. This report shows just what a sad and pathetic bunch of people scientists have become over the global warming issue (on both sides).

If you are so biased to start with then you can always find reasons to support your view...this is not science though.

Though I fully believe in anthropogenic climate change on a global scale, it is clear that Antarctica is cooling. If the ice shelves did stop sea ice depletion then we would expect to see sea ice reduction off the coasts where there is no ice shelf and this is simply not true.

ps. the continent is not growing...was about the same size as always when I last checked.

Typical scientists, go away for eight months, find out some basic details, cherry pick and then miss the whole point of climate-change sceptics. Any idiot knows climate changes all the time, point is what is causing it, the earth has been there done that before, when it has warmed up to temp. exceeding scientist worse nightmares, and man was not driving cars or burning fossil fuels. It's a huge gravy-train that scientist indulge in, please put half your energy into protecting our water which is really in trouble.

So this is how 'Science' works in NZ now. Perfectly reasonable people who see a confidence trick a mile away raise issues with the global warming computer models of the United Nations. A group of 'scientists' then go out and try and fit some ridiculous theory around their version of the truth to ensure they continue to get the money they need to continue their work. If these Scientists had come to any otehr conclusion the following would have occured. 1. No mention in the press. 2. Funding cut immediatly. 3. Career over!