On Feb 15, 12:51*am, Lawrence13 wrote:
On Feb 14, 11:05*pm, Richard Dixon wrote:

On Feb 14, 10:20*pm, Dave Cornwell wrote:

Dawlish wrote:
Idiot.
Lawrence is many things to many people but that - he most definitely ain't.
Dave

You know, I could have *sworn* our Special Friend from the south-west
claimed he only dished out abusive language in retaliation. Sigh.

Anyhow - Lawrence, I get an error for that page (does anyone else?) -
are you able to repost?

Richard

Hey Richard.

I know you know full well how to find that information, never the less
your kindness is appreciated

And I thought that my special friend Dixon would have stopped his
sniping, put the past to bed and concentrated upon the science, but I
fear that is a hope too far. *))

There are times when scientific idiocy has to be exposed for what it
is. Lawrence has introduced this, with his usual swipe at anything
which doesn't fit his political schema and ignoring (being ignorant
of? Even worse..) the context of present global temperatures and
ENSO.

Lawrence; why not explain to the board how the current La Nina fits
with your idea that global temperatures have fallen so far, that it
could be, maybe, the coolest in **9** whole years in a few days time
(on a graph whose trend-line enornously) - and every single one of
those 9 years is in the top 11 warmest in 160 years (Hadley). That's
why what you've said is idiotic and why you are an idiot for saying
it, without realising what you say and without apparently even
realising that without context, you are talking about simple noise
around an obvious warming signal. Are you trying to say GW has stopped
because a day in February might be warmer than 151 years before? The
graph only shows recent years and they are all some of the very
warmest on record.