I think your reply, which is based on a complete fabrication, nicely shows how these movements gather steam. You see, you made something up (which was a complete lie), and because others share your viewpoint, they mod you up. So it must be true!
Have you actually read the letter in Science by Cogley, Kargel, Kaser and Van derVeen? Here's quote from it:
"A bibliographic search suggests that the second WG-II sentence (stating "Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 km2 by the year 2035") is copied inaccurately from (8), in which the predicted date for shrinkage of the world total from 500,000 to 100,000 km2 is 2350, not 2035."
In other words: the 2035 date is a typo. The source material said 2350, not 2035.
(Yes, they also reference another mention of the 2035 date in the same report. However, they note that the citation for this tracks back from one source to another to a source that doesn't give any date at all. They don't speculate where the date came from in that mention of 2035, but I will suggest it probably came from the exact same place-- it's hard to believe independent mistakes would both come up with the identical wrong number.)
