In fact I did read it that way.
I haven’t read the correspondence but, to be fair to Kenneth he’s been open about his pro-Brexit stance on here so it isn’t surprising that he should support Lawson.
I might not agree with Lawson but, in the interests of free speech I don’t see that Ken should not be allowed his point of view.
That post is open to interpretation too Jane. 
Thank you for that, I appreciate it.
You are pulling my leg of course! Whether I support any views one way or the other on global warming is not a matter for you! ‘Put any thoughts out of your minds’, What a terribly arrogant post!
Well, if your English isn’t quite up to scratch then please refrain from posting on controversial subjects! It reads as if you are accusing me of some Global warming nonsense.
Pot meet kettle; again.
I was still reading Jane’s post as a suggestion that you had something to do with global warming denial - you seemed/seem affronted but haven’t actually denied it.
As for arrogant posts if you wish to know what an arrogant post looks like I suggest that you examine your own words - which I quote for your convenience above.
The sad thing is I really did think seriously about cat sitting!
OK Kenneth, I’ve given you a chance, this is just rude. You’re banned
How would I know if Kenneth Wheatley runs an anti-global warming group, whereas it is known, perhaps not by you, that Nigel Lawson does.
He runs it from the same building that Rees Mogg and his cronies run the European Research Group.
I confess that I did not know that Lawson stuck his toe into that particular pie - at least until now.
I also confess that I read your post as implying that Ken had something to do with a group of global warming deniers.
However that should have fallen into the category of a simple misunderstanding, easily cleared up.
Well, he’s the one that has been cleared up.
True… 