[brylie]

The 0.00001 accuracy argument you are making seems like a red herring.

If I measure myself on a scale, do you discredit the measurement because the scale produces a value that is some fractional, fractional, fractional percent of the Earth's mass?

[credit_guy]

Why are you talking about Earth's mass? We are talking about Antarctica here. If I weight myself on a scale that has 0.2 pound precision (like the one I have), and then somehow I tell people I lost 0.002 pounds, some people will be quite skeptical of my claims. In the case of Antarctica, how is one supposed to quantify the accuracy of its net ice loss? By comparing it with the mass of an elephant of a blue whale [1] ?

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/20...

[dTal]

It's a red herring because the total quantity of ice in the Antarctic is irrelevant, both to how the loss rate is measured and the climate significance.

It's like looking at someone who's hair is falling out and saying "look, they're barely losing any weight at all!"