On Dec 10, 6:43*pm, John Hall wrote:
In article ,





*Col writes:
Dawlish wrote:
On Dec 10, 11:41 am, "Col" wrote:

I thought he left simply because he was fed up with the
constant bickering that has plauged this group over the
past few years.

I think you'd better email him and ask him Col. Rather than speculate,
there.

It's not speculation.
I recall him saying that he was posting less because of all the
arguing, which didn't happen in the early days of the group,
and ultimately he seems to have left because of it.

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
--
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 -

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.

On Dec 10, 5:09*pm, Dawlish wrote:


I have Col. I've exchanged emails with Phil on a number of occasions.
That's why I've asked, in the nicest of ways, that you email him and
ask. I'm sure Phil will reply and explain.

================================================== ==

It's Philip, not Phil.


Stephen.

do you see any other reason on here?

MIRROR PLEASE

YOU

On 10/12/2011 5:09 PM, Dawlish wrote:

I have Col. I've exchanged emails with Phil on a number of occasions.
That's why I've asked, in the nicest of ways, that you email him and
ask. I'm sure Phil will reply and explain.

On Dec 10, 6:43*pm, John Hall wrote:
In article ,





*Col writes:
Dawlish wrote:
On Dec 10, 11:41 am, "Col" wrote:

I thought he left simply because he was fed up with the
constant bickering that has plauged this group over the
past few years.

I think you'd better email him and ask him Col. Rather than speculate,
there.

It's not speculation.
I recall him saying that he was posting less because of all the
arguing, which didn't happen in the early days of the group,
and ultimately he seems to have left because of it.

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
--
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 -

True.

On Dec 10, 9:01*pm, Lawrence13 wrote:
On Dec 10, 6:43*pm, John Hall wrote:



In article ,

*Col writes:
Dawlish wrote:
On Dec 10, 11:41 am, "Col" wrote:

I thought he left simply because he was fed up with the
constant bickering that has plauged this group over the
past few years.

I think you'd better email him and ask him Col. Rather than speculate,
there.

It's not speculation.
I recall him saying that he was posting less because of all the
arguing, which didn't happen in the early days of the group,
and ultimately he seems to have left because of it.

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
--
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 -

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.

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

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.