Joe *******i as resurfaced and can now be found here
http://www.weatherbell.com/teambio.html

So do not fret little ones and dry those tears daddy Joe is gonna come
along and allay your fears.

In message
,
Lawrence13 writes
Joe *******i as resurfaced and can now be found here
http://www.weatherbell.com/teambio.html

So do not fret little ones and dry those tears daddy Joe is gonna come
along and allay your fears.

Good for you Laurence no doubt that'll keep your hand busy.
--

Jim

On Mar 13, 1:55*am, Lawrence13 wrote:
Joe *******i as resurfaced and can now be found herehttp://www.weatherbell.com/teambio.html

So do not fret little ones and dry those tears daddy Joe is gonna come
along and allay your fears.

Sorry Lawrence, not interested in the ramblings of this silly
insignificant fellow at present. Our own esteemed "Climate Science
Coalition" has just come out with the idiotic prediction that 2011
will show such a large drop from 2010 that it will be "the coolest
year since 1956 or earlier". Their lack of understanding in basic
facts is laughable - that would require a drop of about 0.8C, when the
whole series shows nothing bigger than about the 0.29C from 1963-64
(Agung eruption). Perhaps they're expecting a slew of large volcanopes
to pop off. These idiots get published by newspapers untroubled by
respect for truth. I also use some time dealing with the idiotic
maunderings of our loony-moony "forecaster" Ring.

On Mar 13, 7:14*pm, Rupert Wood wrote:
On Mar 13, 1:55*am, Lawrence13 wrote:

Joe *******i as resurfaced and can now be found herehttp://www.weatherbell.com/teambio.html

So do not fret little ones and dry those tears daddy Joe is gonna come
along and allay your fears.

Sorry Lawrence, not interested in the ramblings of this silly
insignificant fellow at present. Our own esteemed "Climate Science
Coalition" has just come out with the idiotic prediction that 2011
will show such a large drop from 2010 that it will be "the coolest
year since 1956 or earlier". Their lack of understanding in basic
facts is laughable - that would require a drop of about 0.8C, when the
whole series shows nothing bigger than about the 0.29C from 1963-64
(Agung eruption). Perhaps they're expecting a slew of large volcanopes
to pop off. These idiots get published by newspapers untroubled by
respect for truth. I also use some time dealing with the idiotic
maunderings of our loony-moony "forecaster" Ring.


"volcanopes"

is that some sort of explosive melon?

On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:52:14 -0700 (PDT), Lawrence13
wrote:

On Mar 13, 7:14*pm, Rupert Wood wrote:
On Mar 13, 1:55*am, Lawrence13 wrote:

Joe *******i as resurfaced and can now be found herehttp://www.weatherbell.com/teambio.html

So do not fret little ones and dry those tears daddy Joe is gonna come
along and allay your fears.

Sorry Lawrence, not interested in the ramblings of this silly
insignificant fellow at present. Our own esteemed "Climate Science
Coalition" has just come out with the idiotic prediction that 2011
will show such a large drop from 2010 that it will be "the coolest
year since 1956 or earlier". Their lack of understanding in basic
facts is laughable - that would require a drop of about 0.8C, when the
whole series shows nothing bigger than about the 0.29C from 1963-64
(Agung eruption). Perhaps they're expecting a slew of large volcanopes
to pop off. These idiots get published by newspapers untroubled by
respect for truth. I also use some time dealing with the idiotic
maunderings of our loony-moony "forecaster" Ring.


"volcanopes"

is that some sort of explosive melon?


Thank you for a Monday morning chuckle, Lawrence

On Mar 14, 10:08*am, Elizabeth Richmond
wrote:
On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:52:14 -0700 (PDT), Lawrence13





wrote:
On Mar 13, 7:14 pm, Rupert Wood wrote:
On Mar 13, 1:55 am, Lawrence13 wrote:

Joe *******i as resurfaced and can now be found herehttp://www.weatherbell.com/teambio.html

So do not fret little ones and dry those tears daddy Joe is gonna come
along and allay your fears.

Sorry Lawrence, not interested in the ramblings of this silly
insignificant fellow at present. Our own esteemed "Climate Science
Coalition" has just come out with the idiotic prediction that 2011
will show such a large drop from 2010 that it will be "the coolest
year since 1956 or earlier". Their lack of understanding in basic
facts is laughable - that would require a drop of about 0.8C, when the
whole series shows nothing bigger than about the 0.29C from 1963-64
(Agung eruption). Perhaps they're expecting a slew of large volcanopes
to pop off. These idiots get published by newspapers untroubled by
respect for truth. I also use some time dealing with the idiotic
maunderings of our loony-moony "forecaster" Ring.

"volcanopes"

is that some sort of explosive melon?

Thank you for a Monday morning chuckle, Lawrence - Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It's the only way he has of getting out of the holes he digs for
himself in when he attempts to talk science, Elizabeth. He's probably
done this ever since he was a child and though it may have saved him
from some sticky situations. it has left him with this all-pervading
sense of inadequacy and a dislike of the world, because no-one
actually takes him seriously when he talk about things that he thinks
are serious.

It's a funny throwaway line, though Lawrence, I'll grant you that -
especially from someone whose own grasp of English is tenuous, at
best. *))

On Mar 15, 12:14*am, Dawlish wrote:
On Mar 14, 10:08*am, Elizabeth Richmond
wrote:





On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:52:14 -0700 (PDT), Lawrence13

wrote:
On Mar 13, 7:14 pm, Rupert Wood wrote:
On Mar 13, 1:55 am, Lawrence13 wrote:

Joe *******i as resurfaced and can now be found herehttp://www.weatherbell.com/teambio.html

So do not fret little ones and dry those tears daddy Joe is gonna come
along and allay your fears.

Sorry Lawrence, not interested in the ramblings of this silly
insignificant fellow at present. Our own esteemed "Climate Science
Coalition" has just come out with the idiotic prediction that 2011
will show such a large drop from 2010 that it will be "the coolest
year since 1956 or earlier". Their lack of understanding in basic
facts is laughable - that would require a drop of about 0.8C, when the
whole series shows nothing bigger than about the 0.29C from 1963-64
(Agung eruption). Perhaps they're expecting a slew of large volcanopes
to pop off. These idiots get published by newspapers untroubled by
respect for truth. I also use some time dealing with the idiotic
maunderings of our loony-moony "forecaster" Ring.

"volcanopes"

is that some sort of explosive melon?

Thank you for a Monday morning chuckle, Lawrence - Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It's the only way he has of getting out of the holes he digs for
himself in when he attempts to talk science, Elizabeth. He's probably
done this ever since he was a child and though it may have saved him
from some sticky situations. it has left him with this all-pervading
sense of inadequacy and a dislike of the world, because no-one
actually takes him seriously when he talk about things that he thinks
are serious.

It's a funny throwaway line, though Lawrence, I'll grant you that -
especially from someone whose own grasp of English is tenuous, at
best. *))- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

*)) I saw the typo immediately after posting, but couldn't see any
way of correcting it - I may have missed something.