Haha, I love it. I go and use the same argument that you and others have been using and you in turn say that it is a crap argument. Brilliant.
create an easily defeatable strawman and then destroy it!
Gee, that sounds really familiar.
You then go and link to articles that do nothing to prove that the antarctic isn't melting. Two of the articles talk about sea level rise trends (or lack there of). This does nothing to prove that the ice isn't melting as sea-based ice will not cause any sort of sea level rise (as has been said many times throughout this thread). So showing that there hasn't been much sea level rise after ice shelves have melted in the antarctic proves nothing. The other one is regarding the eastern shelves that have not receded and are considered stable. You've linked to a lot of articles about that same subject, to "prove" that the entire continent of Antarctica is stable. Some shelves are stable, yes. That doesn't account for the entire continent as a whole. What you haven't talked about is the GRACE data which can measure the continent as a whole and has shown that the continent has been losing ice (taking into account the stability of the Fimbul shelf). Further more, much of the stablization of the eastern shelves is in part due to localized climate stability in the region, partly which has to due with the weakened ozone layer above Australia and that region. More energy is being let back out into space which results in a weaker warming effect in that region.
In fact, even in one of the very articles that you linked to says the following in it:
The SEAFRAME network, however, also plays a critical role in contributing to a regional and international early warning capability for climate change. For example, there is a lag from when the melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice expanses starts to have a significant impact on global sea levels, and the SEAFRAME network will enable us to detect the early stages and monitor the ongoing trends of those impacts on sea level change in the South Pacific region. We may be detecting those early stages now, but they may not yet be discernable from the prevailing short-term trends.
So they even state that their study does not do anything currently to prove or disprove the effects of ice melt and that due to the lag their findings don't do anything to explain what the current ice situation is like at the southern ice cap. If ice continues to melt, and in turn land-based ice starts to melt, then their study will shed some light as to how sea level rise will be as a result. But, you take irrelevant studies and try to link them to theories that have nothing to do with those studies. They didn't make those absurd connections...you did!
Finally, scientists have also been using seismographs to understand the movement of ice and have found that a lot of land based ice has been shifting recently. Think of it like a bookshelf with bookends on each side. Western Antarctica being one end and Eastern Antarctica being the other. Just because one side is stable and the other isn't, doesn't mean that if you remove one side, then the books will still be stable. That just isn't true. They're showing a lot of instability and even if one side is stable and on the other side all the ice shelves are collapsing, that will still lead to a lot of land-based ice that could be at risk.
Why is it that you've ignored the GRACE data? In fact, the GRACE data is probably our most accurate look into the shifting ice mass in the antarctic.
-Sea level rise does nothing to summarize the current ice melt situation in Antarctica and won't for quite some time.
-Just because the eastern shelves are stable does not mean that the continent as a whole is.