Bookmark this classic 1995 article in the Canberra Times. This guy had the entire scam nailed from day one.
To conclude that CO2 emissions are a threat to the environment would be doubtful and premature. Only a closer examination of the atmosphere over a long period and further detailed studies will decide the matter,” Barrett said in a recent scientific paper which caused frissons of anger among scientists.
Barrett, from Imperial College’s chemistry department, pours thinly veiled scorn on the arguments of the “warmers”, saying they are based on unreliable data, misunderstand the self-correcting nature of the earth’s atmosphere and represent science-by-committee. He says IPCC scientists based their theories on the fact that the earth’s temperature has increased by 0.8°C in the 20th century.
“This is within the expected margins of error for such a study,” he says. “A hard scientific view would be that there has been no discernible change in the earth’s temperature despite the significant increase of 25 per cent in the level of carbon dioxide. To blame the increase in carbon dioxide level for this alleged slight temperature increase seems to be a piece of poor scientific judgment that only a large committee could achieve.
“The lPCC’s reports do indicate that the conclusions are not unanimous but none of the doubters’ arguments is published. Proper science is not carried out by voting.”
The world’s climate had fluctuated naturally over the centuries. In Roman Britain, the climate was warm enough to allow grapes for red wine to be cultivated in the south.
“In the 20th century factors influencing the weather have been volcanic eruptions which put vast quantities of gas and dust into the atmosphere. Another factor is the variation in the strength of the sun depending on sun-spot cycles.
“And what the ‘warmers’ cast aside — the effect of variations in temperature in the oceans. Because if the oceans warm up by whatever means — maybe volcanic activity on the seabed, and there’s a lot of that — if the ocean warms up then CO2 will be less soluble forcing more of it out [into the atmo- sphere].
“The ‘warmers’ are possibly putting the cart before the horse. The sea warms up, then the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere goes up; there’s a lag of about five months.”
Barrett points out with some glee that much of conventional opinion 15 years ago, using similar data, was predicting the earth was heading for a new ice age.
“Normally scientific argument is rigorous and open, but these fellas at the IPCC publish their own conclusions. It’s a hell of a gravy train this, I tell you, which is why they don’t like seeing any doubts expressed. There is scope here for argument; there are so many uncertainties. It’s OK for academics to talk about these things and argue bitterly, but it’s another to come to a premature decision that will cost governments a vast amount of money.”
— Reuter
01 Aug 1995 – Chemist queries global warming
