On Dec 11, 10:33*am, John Hall wrote:
In article
,





*Lawrence13 writes:
On Dec 10, 6:43*pm, John Hall wrote:

Yes, that's my recollection too. I think the interminable arguments
about GW got too much.

It's probably relevant that the charter for this group, which is
probably largely his work since he was the group's original proposer,
includes: "Any discussion of climate issues should be from a scientific
standpoint and not a political (or environmental-activist) one." So he
obviously feared what might happen, but it happened anyway. See:

http://www.usenet.org.uk/uk.sci.weat...uk.sci.weather

Yes it was that John and I think I was partially to blame, which is a
shame as I liked Phillip. He was right of course but the trouble is
you get to know people and its difficult having to start in another
group.

It was big of you to say that. It's things like that which, in spite of
the times I want to strangle you, make me like you.
--
John Hall
* * * * * * *"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism
* * * * * * * by those who have not got it."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * George Bernard Shaw- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



Well thanks for that John. It's just that I saw this topic on
Phillip's leaving of this NG and it would be dishonest and cowardly
not to accept my part in the affair. As I said I liked Philip and
being a professional forecaster I guess I was a tad in awe. So it
surprised and upset me that my mad posts and views were partly
involved causing him to give up in frustration -that was never my
intention. In fact Philip actually helped me when I was ranting about
Patricia Hewitt's preposterous claim on radio five many years ago that
the UK had just suffered the worst winter in 40 years when defending
the NHS. It was dishonest and Philip knew that as well-what with
presenting the forecast on five live and that.