I'm not sure how it could be considered a "mark against [...] AGW". One thing to keep in mind is that temperatures in East Antarctica are nearly always below fr

I'm not sure how it could be considered a "mark against [...] AGW". One thing to keep in mind is that temperatures in East Antarctica are nearly always below freezing, so rising temperatures don't have much of an effect at first on mass loss[0]. From the article, the ice accumulation seems to be from increased snowfall during the Holocene. How this will ultimately be affected by warming isn't clear, but for now it seems somewhat orthogonal to AGW. [0] Instead, most mass loss from Antarctica appears to be at the margins and driven by ocean processes.