Hayward, Steven

==u colo hire cf churchill

called out by grijalva

note has no enviro training, but is expert and teaches courses in free mkt enviro

shillenberger breakthru reportpost partisan power<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20170418132202/https://thebreakthrough.org/blog/Post-Partisan%20Power.pdf">https://web.archive.org/web/20170418132202/https://thebreakthrough.org/blog/Post-Partisan%20Power.pdf</a>bs  bk; “Marc Morano’s book Green Fraud provides a factual scientific and political account of the Green New Deal and other misanthropic and self-serving schemes of the global elite and their opportunistic or deluded acolytes.” —Will Happer, Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics emeritus, Princeton University<div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">
</div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">“Morano is truly the Pete Rose and Hank Aaron of climate contrarians.” —Steven Hayward of Power Line</div>October 10, 2017<a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">Steven Hayward </a>was co-author of a <a href="http://www.brainerddispatch.com/news/4341486-wind-power-living-potential-conservative-groups-says-no-supporters-disagree" rel="nofollow" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">report written for the Center of the American Experiment </a>critical of wind power in Minnesota. While the <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20171020181341/https://2lffqo2moysixpyb349z0bj6-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/10.17-MN-Energy-Policy-Report-Final.pdf" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">full report</a> does not explicitly promote a fall back to coal-fired power plants, it claims that Minnesota has “little to show” for its investment in wind power, “except higher electricity bills.” <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/center-american-experiment#s6" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">[6]</a>, <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/center-american-experiment#s11" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">[11]</a>“Minnesota is actually failing to achieve the object of its policy, which is to reduce greenhouse gases,” said Hayward. <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/center-american-experiment#s6" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">[6]</a> In Mere Environmentalism: A Biblical Perspective on Humans and the Natural World, Steven F. Hayward provides a thorough examination of the philosophical presuppositions underlying today's environmentalist movement and the history of policies intended to alleviate environmental challenges such as overpopulation and global warming. Relying on Scripture to understand God's created order, Hayward offers an insightful reflection on the relationship between humans and the natural world.<div>
</div>

=<div>=</div><div><a href="https://www.thebulwark.com/the-decay-at-the-claremont-institute-continues/">https://www.thebulwark.com/the-decay-at-the-claremont-institute-continues/</a></div><div>
</div><div><div class="the-content " style="box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: none;">when the Claremont Institute, America’s Trumpiest think tank, is in the news nowadays, it is mostly because of John Eastman, the institute senior fellow who wrote the notorious “<a href="https://www.thebulwark.com/the-claremont-institutes-bogus-censorship-charge/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">coup memos</a>” for Donald Trump. Last month, a federal judge <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840.260.0.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">ruled</a> that Eastman and Trump were likely involved in a criminal conspiracy together. The ruling arose from a civil suit concerning Eastman’s claim that some of his documents should not be disclosed to the House Jan. 6th Committee, and the judge only opined on possible criminal behavior because it factored into the narrow decision regarding Eastman’s claims. Still, the ruling is an important reminder of what was at stake with Eastman’s work for Trump: nothing less than a concerted effort to overturn a democratic election and thwart the peaceful transfer of power, which, had it succeeded, would have brought on a major constitutional crisis. The judge ordered Eastman to hand over to the committee 101 documents he had been withholding, and Eastman has <a href="https://www.burnhamgorokhov.com/statement-on-march-28-ruling-in-eastman-v-thompson-et-al/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">grumblingly</a> said he will comply—although he now wants to withhold <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/19/politics/john-eastman-january-6-documents/index.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">another big batch</a>.The Eastman saga has been the most prominent Claremont Institute-related drama in recent weeks, but it hasn’t been the only one. The institute’s descent into <a href="https://www.thebulwark.com/what-the-hell-happened-to-the-claremont-institute/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Trumpian trolling, conspiracism, and fringe extremism</a> has continued to have bizarre ripple effects. It is worth taking a look at some episodes of the last few weeks and what they reveal about the institute’s character—and how Claremont’s leaders seem to understand that character themselves.Last month, the American Mind, the Claremont Institute’s web magazine, published an article called “<a href="https://americanmind.org/salvo/the-decline-is-real/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">The Decline is Real</a>.” Brimming with male sexual anxiety, the piece discusses some research suggesting that testosterone levels and sperm levels are falling in Western populations. It edges up close to <a href="https://www.thebulwark.com/shadow-literature/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">replacement theory</a>. And it gripes about “clownworld”—“Soy boys. Simps. Plant-based lifestyles. Polyamory. Incels. Furries. Et cetera… honk honk!”—and suggests that the “dissident right” is “unique[ly]” well suited to making men manly.But the problem with the piece is less its content than the author’s background. The American Mind has made something of a habit of publishing pseudonymous writers: “Peachy Keenan,” “The Huntsman,” “Horatius,” “Rebecca,” “Privata,” and others. So it is, too, with the article worried about Western man’s sperm count—but its pseudonymous author, “Raw Egg Nationalist,” stands apart for having recently published a book with a Nazi publishing house. As in: a publishing house that is infatuated with Adolf Hitler.I wish I were joking or exaggerating. What Raw Egg Nationalist’s American Mind byline doesn’t tell you is that his Raw Egg Nationalism Cookbook is <a href="https://antelopehillpublishing.com/product/raw-egg-nationalism-cookbook/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">published</a> by <a href="https://antelopehillpublishing.com/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Antelope Hill Publishing</a>. Antelope Hill is a small publishing house that translates and publishes books like A New Nobility of Blood and Soil, by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Walther_Darr%C3%A9" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Richard Walther Darré</a>, described in this way on the <a href="https://antelopehillpublishing.com/product/a-new-nobility-of-blood-and-soil-by-richard-w-darre/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Antelope Hill site</a>:<blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; padding: 15px 30px; margin: 0px 0px 30px; border-left: 5px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Richard Walther Darré, an Obergruppenführer in the SS, was the leading “Blood and Soil” ideologist of Germany and served his people as Reich Minister of Food and Agriculture. This book, A New Nobility of Blood and Soil, was massively popular in the Third Reich and led to a strengthening of the agrarian and agriculturalist movements. Highly influential on Hitler, the principles in this book are foundational to the National Socialist worldview.</blockquote>Antelope Hill, we learn, is proud to present this new translation of Darré’s book, which is the first English-language edition. A <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/amazons-still-selling-lots-of-nazi-books?ref=scroll" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Daily Beast article</a> from January referred to Antelope Hill as “openly fascist”; a blog that tracks reactionary racism <a href="https://angrywhitemen.org/2021/12/31/amazon-is-selling-books-by-a-white-supremacist-publishing-company/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">labeled it</a> “a white supremacist publishing company”; and Amazon has faced calls to stop selling its products. The Antelope Hill Twitter and Instagram feeds contain <a href="https://mobile.twitter.com/AntelopeHill/status/1505997675178573824" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">promotional</a> material that playfully celebrates “<a href="https://mobile.twitter.com/IndianMLKFan/status/1504234586494091264" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">uncle Hitler</a>.” To celebrate Hitler’s birthday yesterday, Antelope Hill offered a discount on all its books, and an even bigger discount on a collection of Hitler’s speeches, with the cutesy discount code “birthday_boy”:<img loading="lazy" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-82601" src="https://www.thebulwark.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/antelope-hill.jpg" alt="" width="1136" height="228" srcset="https://www.thebulwark.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/antelope-hill.jpg 1136w, https://www.thebulwark.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/antelope-hill-300x60.jpg 300w, https://www.thebulwark.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/antelope-hill-1024x206.jpg 1024w, https://www.thebulwark.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/antelope-hill-768x154.jpg 768w" sizes="(max-width: 1136px) 100vw, 1136px" style="box-sizing: border-box; height: auto; max-width: 100%; border: 0px; vertical-align: middle; clear: both; display: block; margin: 34px auto;" />The Claremont Institute seems to have no qualms publishing one of <a href="https://www.instagram.com/antelopehillpublishing/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Antelope Hill</a>’s <a href="https://mobile.twitter.com/Babygravy9/status/1442221019113172999" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">main authors</a>.And it is impossible to believe that the publishers of the American Mind do not understand who Raw Egg Nationalist is and what he stands for.For one thing, he appeared as <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/raw-egg-nationalist-jml-077/id1441895691?i=1000541536358" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">recently as November 11</a> of last year on Jack Murphy’s <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/jack-murphy-live/id1441895691?mt=2" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">podcast</a>. Murphy was a Lincoln Fellow at the institute last summer, and numerous prominent Claremont folks have come on his podcast since its inception in 2018. For example, Matthew Peterson, the founder and original editor of the American Mind, was Murphy’s guest a couple of weeks before Raw Egg Nationalist, and Glenn Ellmers, a Claremont senior fellow, was on the show a few days before that.Other Claremonters Murphy has hosted include <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ryan-williams-jml-021/id1441895691?i=1000467551293" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Ryan Williams</a> (president of the Claremont Institute); <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/thomas-g-west-jml-083/id1441895691?i=1000545081148" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Thomas G. West</a> (senior fellow and a member of Claremont’s board of directors); <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/jml-sessions-007-klavan-and-millerman/id1441895691?i=1000531501666" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Spencer</a> <a href="https://sites.libsyn.com/139925/spencer-klavan-jml-060" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Klavan</a> (an editor at the Claremont Review of Books and features editor at the American Mind); <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/jack-posobiec-raw-and-unedited/id1441895691?i=1000444056844" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Jack</a> <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/jack-posobiec-jml-061/id1441895691?i=1000528633293" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Posobiec</a> (2019 Lincoln Fellow); <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/michael-anton-jml-032/id1441895691?i=1000490800076" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Michael</a> <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/friday-sessions-003-on-jml-anton-and-yarvin/id1441895691?i=1000516036031" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Anton</a> (Claremont senior fellow); <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/christopher-caldwell-jml-051/id1441895691?i=1000513086823" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Christopher Caldwell</a> (Claremont senior fellow); <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/dave-reaboi-jml-035-jazz-trump-and-peace-in-the-middle-east/id1441895691?i=1000493485889" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Dave</a> <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/friday-sessions-001-on-jml-beattie-chamberlain-and-reaboi/id1441895691?i=1000512126448" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Reaboi</a> (Claremont fellow and 2012 Lincoln Fellow); and <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/arthur-milikh-jml-050/id1441895691?i=1000512852010" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Arthur Milikh</a> (executive director of Claremont’s Center for the American Way of Life). Several of Murphy’s other guests have been alumni of Claremont’s fellowship programs, including Breitbart writer <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/allum-bokhari-jml-012/id1441895691?i=1000431551962" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Allum Bokhari</a>, anti-critical-race-theory activist <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/christopher-rufo-jml-034-president-trump-declares-war/id1441895691?i=1000492372527" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Christopher Rufo</a>, and <a href="https://www.thebulwark.com/even-as-his-big-conspiracy-theory-crumbles-darren-beatties-star-continues-to-rise-in-trump-world/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Trumpist conspiracy theorist</a> <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/dr-darren-j-beattie-jml-033/id1441895691?i=1000491632018" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Darren Beattie</a>.In short: Jack Murphy is a Claremont intimate, and his hosting Raw Egg Nationalist is another indication that the latter is a known quantity to the Claremont crowd.Murphy’s interview with Raw Egg Nationalist is, unsurprisingly, offensive. The two men share an interest in bodybuilding as a way of life; during a discussion of the relationship between mind, body, and aesthetics, Murphy asks Raw Egg Nationalist to explain how he understands the relationship between physiognomy and politics. Raw Egg Nationalist says:<blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; padding: 15px 30px; margin: 0px 0px 30px; border-left: 5px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">I think that it’s difficult . . . today not to see just how closely linked together nutrition and lifestyle and political orientation are. . . . Bring up all of the mug shots from the “mostly peaceful protests” of last summer and you’ll see that all of these people look the same. I mean, they are hideously ugly, malformed people.</blockquote>Raw Egg Nationalist concludes that the left has abandoned all concerns with health and “is for a kind of dysgenic existence.” It follows, then, that, “the right, or some people on the right and some traditionalists, just have to be for a healthy physical lifestyle. I think it’s that simple.”Murphy agrees: “It really is. And I was out on the streets during all the riots in Washington, D.C., and I’ve seen the protesters right up front.”The exchange, which takes place ten minutes into their conversation, offers a crystal-clear glimpse of this Claremont writer’s character, in case his choice of publishing house isn’t already enough of a tell.it’s worth saying more about Jack Murphy.Murphy is a prominent influencer in the “Manosphere” and the founder of a secretive manliness club called the Liminal Order. “Jack Murphy” is also a pseudonym. His real name is reportedly John Goldman, a fact that became common knowledge in December of last year following salacious revelations about his past.In 2018, Murphy wrote a blog post about sending his girlfriend to have sex with a stranger from Tinder. This became known as Murphy’s “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzuI8A94EQY" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">cuck article</a>,” and it caused a stir on the right—both the family-values right and the cult-of-masculinity right. It further turned out that Murphy had participated in amateur pornography, and that he had been placed on <a href="https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/185902/behind-the-consulting-firm-raking-in-millions-from-dc-charter-schools/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">administrative leave</a> from a job with Washington, D.C.’s public charter schools for wildly <a href="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/john-goldman-jack-murphy-c11f59e8db03/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">misogynist and racist screeds</a> he had posted <a href="https://crooksandliars.com/2018/01/dc-charter-school-board-official-exposed" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">online</a>.The revelations about Murphy/Goldman received coverage last December from conservative journalists like Rod Dreher at the <a href="https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/jack-murphy-queer-as-volk-gay-beard/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">American Conservative</a>, Mary Harrington at <a href="https://unherd.com/thepost/the-online-right-cancels-one-of-its-own" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">UnHerd</a>, and Megan Fox at <a href="https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/megan-fox/2021/12/31/conservative-influencer-jacky-murphy-who-teaches-men-to-be-alphas-is-an-amateur-gay-porn-star-and-a-fraud-n1545551" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">PJ Media</a>. (This scrutiny came after an earlier period of wagon-circling: Two months earlier, one Twitter user <a href="https://twitter.com/smalwigwamlight/status/1447324581547683840" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">was blocked by several prominent Catholic integralists</a> after he criticized their acceptance of Murphy.)But a far more tragic story was unfolding right around the time of Murphy’s scandals: On December 27, a <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/dead-officer-injured-killing-spree-denver-police/story?id=81966638" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">deadly shooting spree</a> in Denver left six people dead, including the alleged shooter, Lyndon McLeod.Before the tragedy, McLeod was a far-right novelist who wrote under the pseudonym Roman McClay. The Denver shootings followed the plot of his novels, and <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2021/12/29/denver-shooting-named-victims-books/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">two of his victims</a> were mentioned by name in the books.McLeod <a href="https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/12/30/2071914/-Denver-shooter-s-ties-to-far-right-figures-on-social-media-underline-misogyny-s-key-role-in-violence" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">was also a fan</a> of Jack Murphy’s, and he even appears <a href="https://21studios.com/manosphere-statement-jack-murphy-roman-mcclay/" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">to have been</a> a member of Murphy’s club, the Liminal Order.What’s more, Murphy returned the future mass shooter’s admiration. In an online post from February 2020, he deemed Roman McClay’s work “<a href="https://jackmurphylive.com/make-no-small-plans-why-art-and-inspiration-are-essential-to-fight-the-culture-war/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">an epic three volume masterpiece</a>.” (He praised the work of reactionary writers Bronze Age Pervert and Curtis Yarvin in the same context.) After the Denver shootings, even Anthony Dream Johnson, the self-professed “President of the Manosphere,” was <a href="https://21studios.com/manosphere-statement-jack-murphy-roman-mcclay/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">willing</a> to denounce Jack Murphy. But Claremont stayed mum.To summarize: One of Claremont’s future Lincoln fellows had an unconventional sexual relationship with his girlfriend that he wrote about publicly, created pornography, broadcast truly vile racist and misogynist views, and celebrated the violent fictions of a person who would later use them as a roadmap for conducting his own mass shooting.you will recall Murphy’s Claremont-heavy roster of podcast guests before his scandals in December. The description for <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ryan-williams-jml-021/id1441895691?i=1000467551293" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">one</a> of those episodes contains this intriguing line: “Ryan Williams, The President of the Claremont Institute, explains to Jack Murphy why they engaged with Bronze Age Pervert, Curtis Yarvin, and Jack Posobiec.”The interview took place in March 2020, the month after Murphy praised McLeod’s violent novels. Much of it is dedicated to standard-fare Claremont grievance-mongering against identity politics, multiculturalism, and the left. But almost an hour into the conversation, Murphy does ask Williams directly why Claremont decided to engage with “underground new media figures” like Bronze Age Pervert (BAP), Yarvin, Posobiec, and himself.First, he praises Williams for Claremont’s engagements with “your grassroots population,” mentioning Michael Anton’s <a href="https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/are-the-kids-altright/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">review</a> of Bronze Age Pervert’s book in the Claremont Review of Books and a BAP <a href="https://americanmind.org/features/conservatism-in-the-bronze-age/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">symposium</a> at the American Mind. “This was, like, a big signal to me that you guys understood the landscape,” Murphy says. “So can you tell me how the Bronze Age Pervert connection came to be?… How did it all work out? Would you do it again?”Williams is prepared for this. Beginning cautiously, he says that he and others had noticed BAP’s “weird little book” floating around among young folks on the right and wanted to talk to Claremont’s “very boomer” audience about it as a youth phenomenon. He also wanted to communicate the way “some of his older peers and fellow travelers at Claremont talked about politics and took seriously this energy amongst the young on the right that was sort of up for grabs.”Williams acknowledges the dangers involved in making these overtures, and says that Claremont traditionally stands for equal rights and believes reactionary politics is a “dead end.” He appears to suggest that his goal in engaging BAP’s audience was to show them an alternative approach and outlook.But soon Williams starts to hedge. Sounding increasingly sympathetic to what Murphy calls the “grassroots,” he praises BAP’s book as a piece of philosophical art, and admits that they published Anton’s piece in part “to stir things up.” He concedes that Claremont had something to prove: that “we weren’t just fusionist Reagan Republicans,” but are instead “open to new ideas” and “not . . . afraid of the arguments that are gaining some traction on the right.”Then Williams takes a more evangelical turn. He talks about how important it is to bring eclectic and heterodox thinkers like Yarvin to new readers in order to “continue the conversation.” He and Murphy gloat about how these thinkers have influence in Trump’s White House. Williams argues that the very online landscape of the New Right is an “increasingly huge thing” that is quickly replacing and delegitimizing the old media. After windily defending the right-wing conspiracy theorist <a href="https://www.creators.com/read/mona-charen/07/19/claremont-would-make-founders-weep" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Jack Posobiec</a> as “nothing but a gentleman and respectful, an engaged discussant in our seminar and a family man,” Williams insists on the importance of engaging seriously with “this new media landscape” and “this growing cohort of people with huge influence.”He resumes a cautious stance at the end of the episode. In case the audience has forgotten, Williams reminds listeners that Claremont hopes to be the teacher and fearless influencer in its relationship with Murphy’s “grassroots,” not the one being taught and influenced.Murphy, though, heard things differently: “I really commend you guys for . . . the direction you’re taking the organization. I respect it. It got my attention. If the Bronze Age Pervert thing was meant to be a bat-signal to the young and new right and the internet right—well, we heard it, we saw it, here we are.”Williams chuckles at the mention of the bat-signal and doesn’t object to the characterization of Claremont as inviting Murphy and his ilk into its domain. He thanks Murphy for his public-spiritedness, saying that “America is a better place because of what you do, so keep doing what you do.” The Claremont Institute would accept Murphy as a Lincoln Fellow the following year.Maybe Raw Egg Nationalist will make the cut for 2022.this trip through the Claremont underworld ends with a return to a more familiar and respectable side of the institute: a March 17, 2022 <a href="https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/03/podcast-the-claremont-question-with-charles-kesler-and-john-yoo.php" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102); box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">episode</a> of the Power Line podcast hosted by Steven Hayward and featuring guests Charles Kesler and John Yoo. Titled “The Claremont Question,” the episode raises explicit questions about the coherence of the organization and the relationships among its various constituents.Hayward is a resident senior scholar at the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley and a graduate of Claremont Graduate School. Kesler is a professor at Claremont McKenna College and the founding editor of Claremont’s premier publication, the Claremont Review of Books. Yoo, a professor at Berkeley Law School, is best known for authoring the Bush administration’s notorious “<a href="https://www.law.com/2019/11/21/berkeley-laws-john-yoo-courting-controversy-again/?slreturn=20220222135418" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">torture memos</a>,” which made him a figure of perennial controversy. It is a sign of strange times that he is among the least polarizing figures in Claremont’s orbit today.The title of the episode suggests that the three longtime Claremont associates might address the institute’s efforts to accommodate Murphy’s “grassroots.” But while Ryan Williams showed a measure of confidence and security in responding to Murphy’s questions, this conversation went differently. The 44-minute Power Line talk alternates between chummy banter, outrage at the left, and the occasional nod to non-MAGA realities. It is also full of awkward yuks and guffaws. Hayward, Kesler, and Yoo may represent the Claremont Institute’s old guard—the conservative intellectuals who like to have deep conversations about statesmanship and the Founders and the dangers of progressivism—but they don’t have any of the confidence one might expect from them. A mood of uneasiness prevails. The three men often fall into anxious laughter at one another’s bad jokes.“My goodness!” Hayward begins. “The Claremont Institute has everybody’s attention these days, and lots of enemies on the left and on the right. . . . I’m not quite sure where to begin!”After reviewing the facts, he asks Kesler to explain the sources of controversy at Claremont.From the perspective of, say, Bronze Age Pervert and company, Kesler makes a handful of “normie” admissions: His colleague John Eastman’s plan for Vice President Mike Pence was “impossible” and “not credible”; Jan. 6th was “a terrible stain” on the Trump presidency; Trump should probably cede the stage to a younger Republican to draw a better contrast with Biden. But before Kesler gets to all that, he acknowledges a simpler truth: Trump was a boon for Claremont. Everything is going great at the institute, and some of their good fortune has resulted directly from their public pro-Trump stance. Subscriptions to the CRB are at an all time high and growing, he says. They have real momentum.But given everything that has been going on at Claremont, the discussion is awfully evasive. For example, while the three men agree on the most salient part of the Eastman debacle—that there was no real dispute over any state electors—they do not grapple with the implications of that admission. Instead, they act as though Eastman’s various legal notions about Pence’s decision-making authority on Jan. 6th are still worth taking seriously. The truth is closer to this: Eastman can interpret the law however he pleases, but because there was no serious dispute about the electors, his ideas are, at best, perfectly irrelevant to the reality of the situation.Yoo says that Eastman “got the facts wrong but the law right.” Imagine if someone understood the laws governing murder but merely “got the facts wrong” in a given case: it would be the definition of a miscarriage of justice. And when Hayward, Kesler, and Yoo concede that there were no disputed electors, they unwittingly imply that Eastman’s perspective runs closer to delusional fabrication than to serious legal commentary, let alone reasonable advice to a sitting VP with a crucial role to play in the peaceful transfer of power.Rather than grapple with that truth, the group praises Kesler for expounding the Eastman controversy in the pages of the Claremont Review of Books. They revel in the seriousness of a <a href="https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/critique-eastman-memos/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">followup exchange</a> between Eastman and critic Joseph Bessette in the CRB. They take credit for presenting “both sides” of the issue “utterly without snark or invective on either side.” And Kesler prides himself on allowing the magazine not to take a stance on such “very complicated” issues.To be clear, Bessette’s critique of Eastman’s position is excellent. The problem is that the CRB’s “both-sides” approach launders Eastman’s arguments and gives them false legitimacy.And what the CRB did for Eastman, Hayward’s Power Line conversation does for Claremont as a whole. The three members of the old guard are reticent about Eastman, their “friend and colleague,” throughout the episode. This reflects a larger unwillingness to attempt a substantive reckoning with Claremont’s recent past.That past includes plenty of cynical publication decisions—among them, Anton’s solicitous review of Bronze Age Pervert’s book; institutional decisions to grant fellowships to conspiracy theorists and extremist influencers; an eagerness to publish authors too timid to put their real names on their articles, including an author who sends his writing to a Nazi publishing house. Does Charles Kesler think these decisions represent a brave stance on the part of the institute?Conservatives are very good at calling out instances of excess zeal and censoriousness on the left. But the decline at the Claremont Institute demonstrates inverse dangers: namely, the cratering of accountability and good judgment. The Claremont old guard acts as though the rest of what’s happening at the institute isn’t their concern, and with a few exceptions the intellectuals of the New Right operate the same way with respect to the Claremont Institute: as though there are no right-wing viewpoints or associations that can be unequivocally condemned, no liberal norms that don’t deserve challenging, no fringe that’s too fringey for them.In its outreach to the Manosphere, in its welcoming of fascist-curious and bigoted Trumpy writers, not to mention its months of support for lies about the last presidential election, the institute is allying itself with some of the most dangerous tendencies in politics.The Power Line episode ends on a surreal but fitting note:<blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 15px 30px; margin: 0px 0px 30px; border-left: 5px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Steven Hayward (abruptly): Well, we never really did get to the contents of the issue, but that would take us four or five hours. Thank you, Charles; thank you, John.John Yoo (genuinely surprised): That’s it? It’s over?Hayward (cheerfully): I think we’ve taxed our listeners long enough with our quips and jests.Charles Kesler (deadpan): Do you mean to ask . . . is that all there is?(guffaws all around)</blockquote>That’s it: no reckoning, no grappling, no calling to account. Instead, we are left with a throwaway reference to a wry little song by <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCRZZC-DH7M" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-thickness: 2px; text-decoration-color: rgb(208, 2, 27); transition: all 0.15s ease 0s;">Peggy Lee</a>. But “Is That All There Is?” also happens to capture the essence of intellectual life at Claremont today: the carnival atmosphere, the old boys’ club, and the deca</div></div>===

14. National Review Promotes Absurd Climate Change Chart to Suggest Lack of Warming

National Review <a href="https://twitter.com/NRO/status/676516015078039556" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">tweeted</a> that a misleading temperature chart <a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/10/the-only-global-warming-chart-you-need-from-now-on.php" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">published</a> by Powerline’s Steven Hayward was “[t]he only #climatechange chart you need to see.” Hayward wrote that his chart displayed average annual global temperature “with the axis starting not just from zero, but from the lower bound of the actual experienced temperature range of the earth,” and claimed, “[i]f this chart were published on the front page of newspapers the climate change crusaders would be out of business instantly.”

National Review’s tweet was <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/14/why-the-national-reviews-global-temperature-graph-is-so-misleading/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">roundly</a> <a href="https://newrepublic.com/minutes/125800/chart-day-national-review-thinks-average-global-temperatures-flatlined" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">criticized</a> for the chart’s obviously misleading scale (with an appropriately scaled y-axis, the chart shows a demonstrable increase in global temperatures), with Kevin Drum of Mother Jones <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/12/todays-dumbest-chart-presented-chart-form" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">writing</a> that Hayward’s re-scaled chart was “so phenomenally stupid that I figured it had to be a joke of some kind.” Several Twitter users responded to National Review by jokingly posting examples of <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/michael-halpern/how-to-misrepresent-global-warming-in-one-graph-for-dummies" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">similarly misleading charts</a>, including one that the Union of Concerned Scientists described as showing “comfort in the idea that nobody really reads the National Review online.”

http://ecowatch.com/2016/01/04/media-climate-change-2/

==

<h1 class="articleTitle" style=" margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 27px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">CU's Benson complies uneasily with Democratic probe into climate professor</h1>

<div class="author-info" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">By <a href="http://www.coloradostatesman.com/category/bylines/valerie-richardson" style=" text-decoration: none;">Valerie Richardson</a></div>

<div class="sourcename" style=" text-transform: uppercase; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">THE COLORADO STATESMAN</div>

University of Colorado officials have turned over information — albeit grudgingly — on professor Roger Pielke Jr. to U.S. House Democrats on what he calls a “witch hunt” into the funding of certain climate scientists.

CU President Bruce Benson complied last week with a request by U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., for Pielke’s salary, external funding sources and financial-disclosure forms as part of a probe into whether professors who deviate from the so-called “consensus” view on climate change receive fossil-fuel funding.

At the same time, Benson bristled at the implication that the CU Boulder environmental studies professor had somehow slanted his research to advance a political agenda.

“We are aware of nothing to suggest that Professor Pielke’s research and conclusions were influenced by improper considerations,” said the March 23 letter signed by Benson and CU Boulder chancellor Philip DiStefano.

“As we provide this response, we would like to emphasize that Professor Pielke is a highly regarded researcher and that we fully support the principles of academic freedom,” the letter said. “Consistent with the principles of academic freedom, Professor Pielke’s research is subject to rigorous peer review, which helps advance and build scientific knowledge in the field.”

Grijalva, the ranking Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, has come under intense criticism from Republicans and scientific groups, led by the American Meteorological Society, for his investigation into the funding sources of seven professors.

He has defended the probe by noting that the professors have all testified before Congress on climate-change issues. All seven have also challenged the environmental movement’s assertion that elevated carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have triggered extreme weather events.

“I am hopeful that disclosure of a few key pieces of information will establish the impartiality of climate research and policy recommendations published in your institution’s name and assist me and my colleagues in making better law,” said Grijalva in his Feb. 24 letter to Benson.

Two of the professors under investigation have a CU Boulder connection: Pielke, a professor in the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, and Steven F. Hayward, who now teaches at Pepperdine University but spent the 2013-14 academic year as CU’s first Visiting Scholar in Conservative Thought and Policy.

The House Democrats’ investigation comes amid a searing political debate over the funding of academics in the so-called “alarmist” or “warmist” camp versus those in the “denier” or “skeptics” camp. Senate Republicans produced a report last year tying liberal foundations to the funding of climate-change advocacy groups.

Grijalva launched his probe following a New York Times report on the conservative Koch Foundation’s funding of Dr. Wei-Hock “Willie” Soon at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. Soon failed to disclose his financial connection before testifying in the past before Congress, said Grijalva, although Soon has argued that his research is not influenced by his financial support.

In his letter, Grijalva said he was concerned about “potential conflicts of interest and failure to disclose corporate funding sources in academic climate research.”

He said that Pielke’s 2013 Senate testimony “featured the claim, often repeated, that it is ‘incorrect to associate the increasing costs of disasters with the emission of greenhouses gases,’” adding that White House science adviser John Holdren disagrees with Pielke.

“My colleagues and I cannot perform our duties if research or testimony provided to us is influenced by undisclosed financial relationships,” said Grijalva.

Of the seven professors named, Pielke has been the most outspoken, condemning the investigation as a McCarthyist “witch hunt” in a post on his Climate Fix blog headlined, “I Am Under ‘Investigation.’”

“I have no funding, declared or undeclared, with any fossil fuel company or interest,” said Pielke in the Feb. 25 post. “I never have. Representative Grijalva knows this too, because when I have testified before the US Congress, I have disclosed my funding and possible conflicts of interest. So I know with complete certainty that this investigation is a politically-motivated ‘witch hunt’ designed to intimidate me (and others) and to smear my name.”

Pielke also argues that he’s hardly a poster child for climate-change “denial.” While he disagrees with catastrophic global-warming scenarios, he agrees that “human-caused climate change is real” and supports a carbon tax as well as the EPA’s proposed carbon regulations on coal-fired plants. VERIFY

Still, that’s enough to make him controversial. He parted ways with the statistics blog FiveThirtyEight last year after his article, “Disasters Cost More Than Ever — But Not Because of Climate Change,” touched off a social-media campaign to have him fired, described by Discover columnist Keith Kloor as an “ugly pile-on.”

Other climate scientists have weighed in on the Grijalva probe by stressing that funding sources should be transparent while raising concerns about the politics. In 2010, the Republican Attorney General of Virginia came under similar criticism when he launched a probe into the funding of then-UVA climate professor Michael Mann.

“It was wrong when it was done by Republicans and right-wing think tanks, and it’s wrong when it’s done by Democrats and left-wing think tanks,” University of Washington climate professor Eric Steig told National Public Radio.

At least two other universities — Arizona State University and the University of Delaware — have responded to Grijalva’s request. Arizona State’s response was similar to that of CU: ASU President Michael M. Crow provided information on professor Robert Balling’s external funding, salary and financial disclosure forms, but not his testimony or communications, saying ASU did not keep those records.

But the University of Delaware refused to turn over any documentation specific to the funding of professor David Legates, saying such information was “protected by academic freedom,” according to a March 16 letter signed by the president and provost.

CU spokesman Ryan Huff noted that all of the information provided on Pielke was public information.

“Had we received a Colorado Open Records Act request from a member of the public for the identical information, our response would have been the same,” Huff said.

Meanwhile, Pielke has since announced that he will leave the field of climate research. A member of the advisory board for the Breakthrough Institute, which advocates technological solutions for environmental dilemmas, Pielke said in a March 1 blog post he plans to continue focusing on “science, innovation and politics.”

He added that he made his decision long before the launch of the Grijalva investigation.

“I have had my say and as a scholar I am ready to move on to more fertile fields of study,” Pielke said.

</div>

==

http://www.wsj.com/articles/steven-f-hayward-calling-obamas-bluff-on-climate-change-1428361848

Calling Obama’s Bluff on Climate Change

The president is threatening to bypass Congress and sign an international treaty. Here’s how to box him in.

By STEVEN F. HAYWARD

April 6, 2015 7:10 p.m. ET

112 COMMENTS

From immigration to Internet regulation, there is scarcely an issue on which President Obama has not pushed the limits of executive power to achieve his ideological goals. The Republican Congress has been able only to react to these usurpations, often floundering, as seen in the recent debacle over funding for the Department of Homeland Security. Is there a way the GOP Congress can get ahead of Mr. Obama?

This question is especially salient with respect to climate change, as Mr. Obama has indicated that he intends, at the next United Nations climate-change summit to be held this November in Paris, to bypass Congress once again and settle on a “politically binding” climate agreement that he would implement through executive action. This is very different from the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which was regarded as a formal treaty that would have required Senate ratification to take effect. President Clinton never submitted Kyoto to the Senate for a vote: His own council of economic advisers told him it was an economic nonstarter.[well

This episode is relevant today. Before ? Vice President Al Gore embarked for Kyoto, the Senate voted 95-0 for a resolution warning the Clinton administration not to sign an asymmetrical deal that would disproportionately harm the U.S. economy. But that is exactly what Mr. Gore bought back from negotiations. Note that those voting for the resolution included climate-change true believers such as Barbara Boxer and John Kerry.

The basic international economics of greenhouse-gas reduction hasn’t changed in 20 years, and any new U.N. agreement is sure to be Kyoto revisited. Today’s Senate Democrats are so far gone into climate-change hysteria that they would never vote for the kind of resolution that passed in 1997. But GOP legislators might have other options to constrain Mr. Obama’s diplomacy.

First, the House and Senate could pass the climate equivalent of trade-promotion authority, telling Mr. Obama to go forth and negotiate an agreement subject to specific conditions. A climate version should include language saying that any agreement must not be economically asymmetrical, but above all stating that Congress will hold an up-or-down vote on whatever the president brings back from Paris.

Second, the House and Senate could pass a bill blocking federal agencies from regulating greenhouse-gas emissions until two conditions are met: 1) Congress ratifies a new post-2020 climate agreement;[= TPP?] and 2) the nations entering the agreement represent at least 80% of global greenhouse emissions. (The Kyoto Protocol covered barely more than half of the world’s total emissions.)

If crafted properly, such a bill would leave in place regulations that do not target greenhouse emissions directly. For example, it wouldn’t affect the new Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for automobile efficiency, but it would suspend the EPA’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard, a backdoor mandate for ethanol that is designed to suppress conventional petroleum products such as gasoline and diesel.

Both of these measures would restore some balance to climate-change policy. Mr. Obama would surely veto the bills, but this would draw out the administration in ways that would be embarrassing. President Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy have all said that the U.S. can’t act alone on climate change. These measures would call their bluff.

But more than that, they would expose the breathtaking insincerity and situational ethics of Mr. Obama’s executive usurpations. The president has said that climate change is a more serious global threat than Islamic State—on which Mr. Obama has consulted Congress by asking for a new use-of-force resolution. Why not similarly seek the involvement of Congress in global warming, which he considers the more important challenge?

Mr. Hayward is a visiting professor at Pepperdine University’s Graduate School of Public Policy.

==

bs

Steven F. Hayward

Ronald Reagan Professor of Public Policy 2014-2016; Spring 2013 William E. Simon Distinguished Visiting Professor

Office: School of Public Policy (SPP)

E-mail: <a href="mailto:steven.hayward@pepperdine.edu" target="_blank" title="Link to External Site" style=" text-decoration: none; cursor: pointer; background: transparent;">steven.hayward@pepperdine.edu</a>

<li style="margin: 0.4rem 0px; line-height: 1.39em; padding-left: 0px; list-style: none;">Ph.D., American studies, Claremont Graduate School</li>

<li style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0.4rem 0px; line-height: 1.39em; padding-left: 0px; list-style: none;">M.A., Government, Claremont Graduate School</li>

<li style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0.4rem 0px; line-height: 1.39em; padding-left: 0px; list-style: none;">B.S., Business and administrative studies, Lewis and Clark College</li></ul>

Steven F. Hayward, is currently the Thomas Smith Distinguished Fellow at the John M. Ashbrook Center at Ashland University, where he directs the Ashbrook Center's new program in political economy. For the last decade he was the F.K. Weyerhaeuser Fellow in Law and Economics at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., and a Senior Fellow at the Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco.

Hayward writes daily on the popular PowerLineBlog.com, and frequently serves as a guest host for Bill Bennett's national radio show "Morning in America" on the Salem Broadcasting Network. He writes frequently on a wide range of current topics, including environmentalism, law, economics, and public policy for publications including National Review, Reason, The Weekly Standard, The American Spectator, The Public Interest, the Claremont Review of Books, and Policy Review. His newspaper articles have appeared in the New York Times, Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Chicago Tribune, and dozens of other daily newspapers. He is the author of Index of Leading Environmental Indicators, published in 14 editions, and its successor, the Almanac of Environmental Trends. Hayward is the author of a two-volume narrative history of Ronald Reagan and his effect on American political life, The Age of Reagan: The Fall of the Old Liberal Order, 1964-1980, and The Age of Reagan: The Conservative Counter-Revolution, 1980-1989 (CrownForum books). His other books include Mere Environmentalism: A Biblical Perspective on Humans and the Natural World; Churchill on Leadership, and Greatness: Reagan Churchill, and the Making of Modern Statesmen.

Hayward received a Ph.D. in American studies and M.A. in government from Claremont Graduate School and a B.S. in business and administrative studies from Lewis and Clark College.

==

Steven F. Hayward is a resident scholar at the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Enterprise_Institute" title="American Enterprise Institute">American Enterprise Institute</a> (www.aei.org) in Washington, D.C., and a senior fellow at the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pacific_Research_Institute" title="Pacific Research Institute">Pacific Research Institute</a> (www.pacific-research.org) in San Francisco.

"Hayward writes frequently on a wide range of issues, including environmentalism, law, economics, and public policy, and has published dozens of articles in scholarly and popular journals. His work has appeared in <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Review" title="National Review" style="">National Review</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=New_York_Times" title="New York Times" style="">New York Times</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Wall_Street_Journal" title="Wall Street Journal" style="">Wall Street Journal</a>, Reason, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_Weekly_Standard" title="The Weekly Standard" class="mw-redirect" style="">The Weekly Standard</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Policy_Review" title="Policy Review" style="">Policy Review</a>, and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Chicago_Tribune&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Chicago Tribune (page does not exist)" style="">Chicago Tribune</a>. He is a <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Weyerhauser_Scholar&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Weyerhauser Scholar (page does not exist)">Weyerhauser Scholar</a> at the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Enterprise_Institute" title="American Enterprise Institute" style="">American Enterprise Institute</a>, an adjunct fellow of the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Ashbrook_Center&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="John Ashbrook Center (page does not exist)" style="">John Ashbrook Center</a> and a former <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bradley_Fellow&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Bradley Fellow (page does not exist)" style="">Bradley Fellow</a> at the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heritage_Foundation" title="Heritage Foundation" style="">Heritage Foundation</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Weaver_Fellow&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Weaver Fellow (page does not exist)" style="">Weaver Fellow</a> of the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Intercollegiate_Studies_Institute" title="Intercollegiate Studies Institute" style="">Intercollegiate Studies Institute</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Earhart_Fellow&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Earhart Fellow (page does not exist)" style="">Earhart Fellow</a>, and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Olive_Garvey_Fellow&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Olive Garvey Fellow (page does not exist)" style="">Olive Garvey Fellow</a> of the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mont_Pelerin_Society" title="Mont Pelerin Society" style="">Mont Pelerin Society</a>." -- <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pacific_Research_Institute" title="Pacific Research Institute" style="">Pacific Research Institute</a>

The <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Enterprise_Institute" title="American Enterprise Institute">American Enterprise Institute</a> and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pacific_Research_Institute" title="Pacific Research Institute">Pacific Research Institute</a> are both heavily funded by oil billionaires <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Koch_Industries" title="Koch Industries">Koch Industries</a>, and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_Mellon_Scaife" title="Richard Mellon Scaife">Richard Mellon Scaife</a> (<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gulf_Oil" title="Gulf Oil">Gulf Oil</a>).

<ul>

<li>Advisory Board, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Committee_for_a_Constructive_Tomorrow" title="Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow">Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_F._Hayward#cite_note-0" title="">[1]</a></li>

<li>Director, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Property_and_Environment_Research_Center" title="Property and Environment Research Center">Property and Environment Research Center</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_F._Hayward#cite_note-1" title="">[2]</a></li>

</ul>

<h2>Contents</h2></div>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_F._Hayward#Articles">1 Articles</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_F._Hayward#Books">2 Books</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_F._Hayward#Related_Links">3 Related Links</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_F._Hayward#Resources_and_articles">4 Resources and articles</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_F._Hayward#Related_Sourcewatch_articles">4.1 Related Sourcewatch articles</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_F._Hayward#References">4.2 References</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

</ul>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

<h2>Articles</h2>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20040520-083647-7652r" class="external text" title="http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20040520-083647-7652r" rel="nofollow">Jimmy's Party</a>, Washington Times, May 21, 2004.</li>

<li><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14806" class="external text" title="http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14806" rel="nofollow">The Carter-Chavez Connection</a>, FrontPagemag.com, August 26, 2004.</li>

</ul>

<h2>Books</h2>

<ul>

<li>The Real <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jimmy_Carter" title="Jimmy Carter" class="mw-redirect">Jimmy Carter</a>: How Our Worst Ex-President Undermines American Foreign Policy, Coddles Dictators and Created the Party of Clinton and Kerry</li>

<li>Churchill on Leadership</li>

<li>The Age of Reagan: The Fall of the Old Liberal Order 1964-1980</li>

</ul>

<h2>Related Links</h2>

<ul>

<li>"<a href="http://www.aei.org/scholars/filter.,scholarID.28/scholar.asp" class="external text" title="http://www.aei.org/scholars/filter.,scholarID.28/scholar.asp" rel="nofollow">Steven F. Hayward</a>", American Enterprise Institute</li>

</ul>

<h2>Resources and articles</h2>

<h3>Related Sourcewatch articles</h3>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=SEPP" title="SEPP" class="mw-redirect">SEPP</a> - Taylor is found four times on the SEPP website</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=S._Fred_Singer" title="S. Fred Singer">S. Fred Singer</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kent_Jeffreys" title="Kent Jeffreys">Kent Jeffreys</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Alexis_de_Tocqueville_Institution" title="Alexis de Tocqueville Institution">Alexis de Tocqueville Institution</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cesar_Conda" title="Cesar Conda">Cesar Conda</a></li>

</ul>

<h3>References</h3>

<li id="cite_note-0"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_F._Hayward#cite_ref-0" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.cfact.org/site/advisors.asp" class="external text" title="http://www.cfact.org/site/advisors.asp" rel="nofollow">Advisory Board</a>, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, accessed September 19, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_F._Hayward#cite_ref-1" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.perc.org/board.php" class="external text" title="http://www.perc.org/board.php" rel="nofollow">Directors</a>, Property and Environment Research Center, accessed June 13, 2010.</li>

</ol>

<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward">http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward</a>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Ph.D., American studies; M.A., government, Claremont Graduate School</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">B.S., Business and Administrative Studies, Lewis and Clark College</li>

</ul>

Source:<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;"> </a><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[1]</a>

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-weight: 300; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> Background</h2>

Steven F. Hayward is a conservative writer and journalist covering issues including environmentalism, law, economics, and public policy. He is a regular <a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/author/steven" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">blogger</a> at Power Line.

Hayward is associated with numerous conservative think tanks including the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pacific_Research_Institute" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Pacific Research Institute (PRI)</a> where he is a senior fellow in environmental studies, and the American Enterprise Institute where he was formerly a <a href="http://www.aei.org/scholar/steven-f-hayward/" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Weyerhaeuser Fellow</a>. He is also listed as a Board Member and Treasurer of the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/how-heartland-style-climate-sceptic-campaigns-play-hide-deniers-using-secretive-fund" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Donors Capital Fund (DCF)</a>, a group that works with DonorsTrust to give hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations to numerous groups questioning mainstream climate science. <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s2" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[2</a><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s2" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">]</a>, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s3" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[3]</a>

The <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Enterprise_Institute" title="American Enterprise Institute" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">American Enterprise Institute</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pacific_Research_Institute" title="Pacific Research Institute" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Pacific Research Institute</a> are both heavily funded by oil billionaires <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Koch_Industries" title="Koch Industries" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Koch Industries</a>, and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_Mellon_Scaife" title="Richard Mellon Scaife" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Richard Mellon Scaife</a>.

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-weight: 300; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Stance on Climate Change</h2>

“The planet is warming. Human beings are playing a substantial role in that warming. How large that warming is going to be and how we ought to respond to it is still an open question.” <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s4" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">[4]</a>

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-weight: 300; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Key Quotes</h2>

“… we cannot rule out the possibility that the changes of recent decades are part of a natural rebound from the 'Little Ice Age' that followed the medieval warm period and ended in the 19th century.” <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s5" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[5]</a>

</blockquote>

“True, Heartland’s board documents reveal seven-figure contributions for their climate work from one 'anonymous donor,' but environmental organizations take in many multiples of Heartland’s total budget in anonymous donations washed through the left-wing Tides Foundation.”<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s6" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-color: rgb(238, 238, 238);"> [6]</a>

</blockquote>

“As with Three Mile Island, the hysteria of the media and the political class over the Deepwater spill is likely to lead to increased risk and adverse environmental tradeoffs.”

“Even if the costs of the spill exceed $15 billion (to be borne by BP) as now seems likely, the benefits of continued offshore oil production still exceed the costs by a wide margin. Economist Peter Passell estimates a net economic benefit of nearly a trillion dollars from continued offshore production. This will not be a popular position to hold so long as live streaming video of the oil spill continues and the media continue to cover the spill in a state of near hysteria. But it is at precisely such times that rational analysis needs to be heard.” <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s7" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-color: rgb(238, 238, 238);">[7]</a>

</blockquote>

“In any event, it has never been true that we ignore mainstream science; and anyone who reads AEI publications closely can see that we are not 'skeptics' about warming. It is possible to accept the general consensus about the existence of global warming while having valid questions about the extent of warming, the consequences of warming, and the appropriate responses.” <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s8" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[8]</a>

</blockquote>

“A sensible climate policy would emphasize building resilience into our capacity to adapt to climate changes–whether cooling or warming; whether wholly natural, wholly man-made, or somewhere in between.” <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s9" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[9]</a>

</blockquote>

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-weight: 300; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Key Deeds</h2>

April, 2011

Steven Hayward is the author of the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pacific_Research_Institute" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Pacific Research Institute (PRI)</a> publication titled theAlmanac of Environmental Trends <a href="http://www.pacificresearch.org/docLib/20110419_almanac2011.pdf" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">(PDF)</a> which is published every year on Earth Day.

The corresponding website, <a href="http://www.environmentaltrends.org/home.html" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">environmentaltrends.org</a>, describes itself as a “web-based almanac of current trend information and analysis.” Notable among the website's <a href="http://www.environmentaltrends.org/about/staff_members.html" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">staff</a>, other than Hayward himself, is climate change skeptic <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/kenneth-green" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Kenneth P. Green</a> who is associated with a number of think tanks including <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Enterprise_Institute" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">AEI</a>, the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fraser_Institute" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Fraser Institute</a>, and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Reason_Foundation" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Reason Foundation</a>.

According to the print version of the PRI Report, the chief drivers of environmental improvement are economic growth, constantly increasing resource efficiency, technological innovation in pollution control, and “the deepening of environmental values among the American public.” It paints a less favorable picture for government policy, which Hayward describes as a “a lagging indicator, often achieving results at needlessly high cost, and sometimes failing completely.”

The report includes sections on Air Quality (Advocacy Groups “distort air quality data to reinforce public anxiety”), Energy (We have lots of fossil fuels so we shouldn't worry), Climate Change (the science isn't settled), Water Quality (consistently improving), Toxic Chemicals (the EPA's regulations for toxic chemicals are “out of all proportion”) Forests and Land (we have lots of trees, so we shouldn't worry), Biodiversity (it's “impossible to draw definite conclusions” about species loss, but there are “stable or improving fish and bird habitats”), and Public Opinion (people aren't as worried about the environment).

In his report, Hayward asserts that one of the factors skewing public opinion on environmental quality in the U.S. is environmental advocacy groups “… for whom good news is bad news.”

According the section of his report on “Climate Change,” Hayward suggests that climate change has natural causes:

“The historical record suggests that climate shifts can happen suddenly, for reasons that remain unclear. The argument that currently observable climate changes are outside the range of normal climate variability is a key tenet of the climate campaign, and despite the incessant refrain about the “consensus” that “the debate is over,” this core question is far from settled.”

March 15, 2010

Hayward promoted the “Climategate” controversy in an article for The Weekly Standard.<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s5" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[5]</a>

According to Hayward, “Skeptics have known and tried to publicize all of these contrarian or confounding scientific findings [that climate change is natural], but the compliant news media routinely ignored all of them, enabling the IPCC to get away with its serial exaggeration and blatant advocacy for more than a decade.

August 24, 2007

Hayward starred in a Pacific Research Institute video titled “<a href="http://www.pacificresearch.org/press/inconvenient-truth-or-convenient-fiction-sorting-out-sense-from-nonsense-on-global-warming" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Inconvenient Truth or Convenient Fiction: Sorting out Sense from Nonsense on Global Warming</a>.” <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s4" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[4]</a>

July 5, 2006

Hayward <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/aei-want-ad-seeks-scientists-for-sale-10-000-to-first-taker" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">was a co-author of a July 2006 letter </a>sent by the American Enterprise Institute to an unknown number of scientists, looking for someone - at a rate of $10,000 for 10,000 words - whose review “thoughtfully explores the limitations of climate model outputs as they pertain to the development of climate policy.”

<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/feb/02/frontpagenews.climatechange" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">The Guardian reported on the AEI study here</a>. <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s10" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[10]</a>

February 4, 2001

Hayward signed a <a href="http://cei.org/outreach-regulatory-comments-and-testimony/joint-letter-president-bush-epas-climate-action-report" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">letter to President Bush</a> requesting that he withdraw from the “Climate Action Report 2002,” and that the report be rewritten based on “sound science.” The letter also recommends that Bush “dismiss or re-assign all administration employees who are not pursuing your agenda, just as you have done in several similar instances.” <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s15" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[15]</a>

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-weight: 300; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> Affiliations</h2>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Enterprise_Institute" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">American Enterprise Institute (AEI) </a>—<a href="http://www.aei.org/scholar/steven-f-hayward/" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;"> F. K. Weyerhaeuser Fellow and Scholar</a>. <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[1]</a>

</li>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Committee_for_a_Constructive_Tomorrow" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) </a>— Member,<a href="http://www.cfact.org/about/1551/CFACT-Board-of-Advisors" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;"> Board of Advisors</a>.<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s11" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[11]</a>

</li>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Donors_Capital_Fund" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Donors Capital Fund (DCF) </a>— <a href="http://www.donorstrust.org/dcf/board.htm" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Director</a> and Treasurer <a href="http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org//990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_201012_990.pdf" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">(PDF)</a>. <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s3" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[2]</a>, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s3" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[3]</a>

</li>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pacific_Research_Institute" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Pacific Research Institute </a>— <a href="http://www.pacificresearch.org/keypeople/steven-f-hayward" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Senior Fellow, Environmental Studies</a>. <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s12" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[12]</a>

</li>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Property_and_Environment_Research_Center" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Property and Environment Research Center (PERC)</a> — <a href="http://www.perc.org/board.php" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Director</a>. <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s13" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[13]</a>

</li>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Reason_Magazine" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Reason Magazine </a>— Contributing Editor, 1990 - 2001. <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[1]</a>

</li>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heritage_Foundation" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Heritage Foundation</a> — Bradley Fellow, 1997-98; Henry Salvatori Fellow, 1993-94.<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">[1]</a>

</li>

Golden State Center for Policy Studies — Director, 1987 - 1991. <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[1]</a>

</li>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Intercollegiate_Studies_Institute" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Intercollegiate Studies Institute</a> — Richard M. Weaver Fellow, 1985-86. <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[1]</a>

</li>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Claremont_Institute_for_the_Study_of_Statesmanship_and_Political_Philosophy" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Claremont Institute</a> — Director of Journalism, Public Research Syndicated, 1984-87.<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/steven-f-hayward#s1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">[1]</a>

</li>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mont_Pelerin_Society" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Mont Pelerin Society</a> — Olive Garvey Fellow, 1990 - 1992. [14]

</li>

</ul>

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-weight: 300; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> Publications</h2>

Steven F. Hayward contributes to numerous magazines including:

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/author/steven-f.-hayward" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">The Weekly Standard</a></li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://reason.com/people/steven-hayward/all" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Reason Magazine</a></li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/author/206345/bio" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">National Review Online</a></li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/09/20/why-isnt-the-us-a-leader-in-green-technology/know-your-product" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">New York Times</a></li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123440526764875671.html" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Wall Street Journal</a></li>

</ul>

Books

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.environmentaltrends.org/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Almanac of Environmental Trends</a>. Pacific Research Institute, April 2011.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">The Age of Reagan: The Fall of the Old Liberal Order, 1964-1980.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">The Age of Reagan: The Conservative Counter-Revolution, 1980-1989 (CrownForum books).</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Churchill on Leadership, and Greatness: Reagan Churchill, and the Making of Modern Statesmen.</li>

</li>

</ul>

<h2 style=" margin: 0px 0px 0.75em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.3em; font-weight: 300; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> Resources</h2>

<a name="s1" id="s1" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“</a><a href="http://www.aei.org/scholar/steven-f-hayward/" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Steven F. Hayward</a>,” Profile at the American Enterprise Institute. Accessed March, 2012.

</li>

<a name="s2" id="s2" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Form 990 for Donors Capital Fund, Inc. </a><a href="http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org//990_pdf_archive/541/541934032/541934032_201012_990.pdf" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">(PDF - 2010)</a>.

</li>

<a name="s3" id="s3" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“</a><a href="http://www.donorstrust.org/dcf/board.htm" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Board of Directors</a>,” donorstrust.org. Accessed March, 2012.

</li>

<a name="s4" id="s4" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“</a><a href="http://www.pacificresearch.org/press/inconvenient-truth-or-convenient-fiction-sorting-out-sense-from-nonsense-on-global-warming" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Inconvenient Truth or Convenient Fiction: Sorting out Sense from Nonsense on Global Warming</a>,” Pacific Research Institute, August 24, 2007.

</li>

<a name="s5" id="s5" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Steven F. Hayward. “</a><a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/denial" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">In Denial The meltdown of the climate campaign</a>,” The Weekly Standard, Mar 15, 2010, Vol. 15, No. 25.

</li>

<a name="s6" id="s6" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Steven F. Hayward. “</a><a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/why-climate-skeptics-are-winning_631915.html?page=1" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Why the Climate Skeptics Are Winning</a>,” The Weekly Standard, Mar 5, 2012, Vol. 17, No. 24.

</li>

<a name="s7" id="s7" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Steven Hayward. “</a><a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/how-think-about-oil-spills" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">How to Think About Oil Spills: The perils of overreaction</a>,” The Weekly Standard, Jun 21, 2010, Vol. 15, No. 38.

</li>

<a name="s8" id="s8" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Steven F. Hayward. “</a><a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/275tmktp.asp" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Scenes from the Climate Inquisition</a>,” The Weekly Standard, Feb 19, 2007, Vol. 12, No. 22.

</li>

<a name="s9" id="s9" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Steven F. Hayward. “</a><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20070204135040/http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.24401/pub_detail.asp" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Acclimatizing: How to Think Sensibly, or Ridiculously, about Global Warming</a>,” National Review, May 22, 2006. Republished by the American Enterprise Institute. Archived February 4, 2007.

</li>

<a name="s10" id="s10" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Ian Sample. “</a><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/feb/02/frontpagenews.climatechange" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study</a>,” The Guardian, February 2, 2007.

</li>

<a name="s11" id="s11" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“</a><a href="http://www.cfact.org/about/1551/CFACT-Board-of-Advisors" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">CFACT Board of Advisors</a>,” cfact.org. July 8, 2009.

</li>

<a name="s12" id="s12" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“</a><a href="http://www.pacificresearch.org/keypeople/steven-f-hayward" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Steven F. Hayward</a>, Ph.D,” Profile at Pacific Research Institute. Accessed March, 2012.

</li>

<a name="s13" id="s13" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“</a><a href="http://www.perc.org/board.php" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">PERC Board</a>,” Property and Environment Research Center. Accessed May, 2012.

</li>

<a name="s14" id="s14" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“</a><a href="http://www.ashbrook.org/about/staff/hayward.html" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Steven Hayward: Adjunct Fellow</a>,” Ashbrook. Accessed March, 2012.

</li>

<a name="s15" id="s15" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“</a><a href="http://cei.org/outreach-regulatory-comments-and-testimony/joint-letter-president-bush-epas-climate-action-report" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Joint Letter To President Bush On The EPA's Climate Action Report</a>,” Competitive Enterprise Institute. June 7, 2002.

</li>

“<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_F.Hayward" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Steven F. Hayward</a>,” SourceWatch.

</li>

“<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_F.Hayward" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Steven F. Hayward</a>,” Wikipedia.

</li>

<a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=46" target="_blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">ExxonSecrets Factsheet: Steven F. Hayward</a>.

</li>

</ol>

</div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/tags/steven-f-hayward" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Steven F. Hayward</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/700" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">CFACT</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/858" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">American Enterprise Institute</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/913" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">global warming</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/939" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">climate change</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2540" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">desmogblog</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2560" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">global warming blog</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2654" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">denial industry</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2748" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">pacific research institute</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3068" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">climate change denier</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/4046" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">global warming research</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/4047" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">climate misinformation</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5721" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">smogger</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5988" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6886" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">climate change skeptic</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7705" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">climate denialism</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7706" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">denial database</a></div>

<div class="field-item odd" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/8832" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Agenda Media</a></div>

<div class="field-item even" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/9025" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Property and Environment Research Center</a></div>

</div>

==

<h1 style=" box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; line-height: 1.2em;">Democrats' climate probe brings ‘witch hunt’ accusations</h1>

Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva is on a mission to expose climate skeptics. Some say he's going too far.

</header>

By <a href="http://www.politico.com/reporters/AlexGuill%C3%A9n.html" rel="author" class="url fn" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none; font-weight: 700;">ALEX GUILLÉN</a>

2/27/15 5:51 AM EST

Updated <time datetime="2015-02-28T06:28-05:00" style="box-sizing: border-box;">2/28/15 6:28 AM EST</time>

</footer>

</div>

Now conservatives are the ones complaining about being the victims in a politically motivated “war on science.”

In a turnabout from years of debate about intrusion into scientific research, Democratic lawmakers launched investigations this week into the funding sources of several scientists whose work is popular with skeptics of manmade climate change. And that’s bringing a furious counterattack from congressional Republicans and right-wing pundits — including some who cheered on a past probe by former Republican Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli into a leading scientist whose research pointed to man-made causes of climate change.

Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva, the top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, sparked the latest dispute by asking universities to turn over documents about grants, congressional testimony and other activities involving seven scientists who have testified at congressional climate hearings. Grijalva was following up on a New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/us/ties-to-corporate-cash-for-climate-change-researcher-Wei-Hock-Soon.html" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">story</a> reporting that Wei-Hock “Willie” Soon, a researcher at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, had gotten $1.25 million in undisclosed money from fossil fuel companies.

Three Democratic senators then took up the case, asking more than 100 energy companies and trade groups to provide details on their research spending.

</aside>

Supporters of Soon’s research say it casts doubt on human activity being a major driver of global warming. That made the Times story a public relations coup for the green activists who originally uncovered the documents on his funding. But Grijalva’s broadened inquiry prompted conservatives to accuse him of staging an ideological witch hunt, and even one green-minded science group expressed qualms he may have gone too far. Eleven Republican senators rebuked both Democratic probes on Friday as “wholly inappropriate.”

Still, Democrats are undeterred, saying the two cases are in no way comparable. They note that a strong majority of climate scientists say climate change is real, is primarily driven by human-caused greenhouse gas pollution and poses a threat to civilization.

“Republicans went after amazing scientists doing honest and great work on climate change,” said a spokesman for Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who helped lead the Senate Democrats’ information request to the energy trade groups. Spokesman Eben Burnham-Snyder added, “What’s different here are some clear indications that the very same companies and trade groups who have been sowing doubt on climate change and stopping any sort of legislative action in Congress, also may have been participating in these ‘denial for hire’ operations where they would pay very specifically for results.”

Grijalva was unavailable to comment on the flap Thursday.

But critics of his document request were quick to liken it to McCarthyism — or worse.

“Are You Now or Have You Ever Been a Climate Skeptic?” asked a headline on the conservative blog Power Line, which appeared atop a <a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/02/are-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been-a-climate-skeptic.php" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">post</a> written by one of the researchers Grijalva is probing, Steven F. Hayward of Pepperdine University. The climate skeptic blog Junk Science <a href="http://junkscience.com/2015/02/25/shocking-letter-of-intimidation-from-congressman-to-mit-re-climate-skeptic-richard-lindzen/" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">alleged</a> that Grijalva’s probe “closes in on 1933 Germany, and the Soviet Union.”

But Power Line had a different take on Cuccinelli’s climate probe five years ago, after the then-attorney general <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/Virginia_Attorney_General_CID.pdf" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">ordered</a> the University of Virginia to turn over 11 years of emails and a raft of other documents involving former UVA scientist Michael Mann. Cuccinelli <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/03/AR2010050304139.html?sid=ST2010100407513" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">said</a> he wanted to know whether Mann had manipulated data as part of his research, which included a now-famous “hockey stick” graphic showing a sharp increase in global temperatures linked to human activity.

“Cuccinelli’s subpoena has been greeted with howls and protests from warmists and others who view inquiry into a scientist’s work as an infringement of academic freedom — the freedom, that is, to make stuff up, hide or falsify data, and thereby impose trillions of dollars of costs on consumers, all while being supported by taxpayers,” Power Line’s John Hinderaker <a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/05/026262.php" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">wrote</a> in May 2010.

Similarly, JunkScience’s Steve Milloy <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/12/tree-ring-circus-global-warming-hysteria-might-be-/" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">wrote</a> in The Washington Times five years ago that greens’ claims that Cuccinelli was threatening academic freedom were “so much rot.”

“A thorough investigation by someone not in cahoots with the climate mob is the only way to answer legitimate questions related to the expenditure of taxpayer money,” Milloy wrote at the time.

Much like Markey’s spokesman, Hinderaker said Thursday that the Cuccinelli and Grijalva probes are “completely different.”

“The Cuccinelli [document demand] related to the substance of work done by Michael Mann,” Hinderaker wrote in an email to POLITICO. He added: “The Grijalva ‘investigation’ is merely an attempt to smear scientists and others by claiming that they received funding from various private sources; it does not relate to the substance of anything they have written … As you know if you have read my posts, I believe that it is government money, not private money, that is corrupt, because government is the main party in interest in the global warming controversy.”

Cuccinelli’s probe fizzled after the Virginia Supreme Court <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/virginia-politics/post/va-supreme-court-tosses-cuccinellis-case-against-u-va/2012/03/02/gIQAeOqjmR_blog.html" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">ruled</a> he did not have the power to demand the university records.

Unlike Cuccinelli, who sought the documents under Virginia’s Fraud Against Taxpayers Act, Grijalva and the other Democratic lawmakers don’t have subpoena power to back up their requests. But the Democrats are citing a motivation similar to what Cuccinelli had offered: protecting taxpayers from policy influenced by bad science.

“Companies with a direct financial interest in climate and air quality standards are funding environmental research that influences state and federal regulations and shapes public understanding of climate science,” Grijalva <a href="https://www.politicopro.com/f/?f=34750&inb" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">wrote</a> in letters Tuesday to seven universities, including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Colorado and Georgia Tech. “These conflicts should be clear to stakeholders, including policymakers who use scientific information to make decisions.”

Grijalva requested information dating back to 2007, including all drafts of the scientists’ testimony before government bodies, the researchers’ sources of external funding, their financial disclosure forms and “communications” regarding their testimony and funding sources.

Markey and Democratic Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Barbara Boxer of California followed up the next day by <a href="http://www.markey.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/02-25-15_Markey_ClimateDenialOversight_AmericanPetroleumInstitute.pdf" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">asking</a> more than 100 energy companies and trade groups, including the American Petroleum Institute and the National Mining Association, to disclose details on their research funding over the past 10 years.

“This investigation will help to determine who is funding these denial-for-hire operations and whether those who are funded by these fossil fuel interests are keeping their funders’ identities secret from the public and legislators,” Markey said in a statement.

The mining association responded to POLITICO that it “has not financed scientific research on climate change,” although it has commissioned studies on topics including “the serious and far reaching economic consequences of proposed policies ostensibly advanced to address climate change.” API said it is looking into the matter.

Grijalva’s investigation and the Democratic senators’ questions got a rebuttal Friday from all 11 Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, who wrote to the same universities, energy groups and companies to tell them the inquiry was out of line. “We ask you to not be afraid of political repercussions or public attacks regardless of how you respond,” the Republicans wrote.

The scientists themselves were quick to denounce Grijalva’s probe.

“I know with complete certainty that this investigation is a politically motivated ‘witch hunt’ designed to intimidate me (and others) and to smear my name,” Roger Pielke Jr., a professor at the University of Colorado’s Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, <a href="https://theclimatefix.wordpress.com/2015/02/25/i-am-under-investigation/" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">wrote</a> on his blog Tuesday under a photo of former Sen. Joe McCarthy.

“I have no funding, declared or undeclared, with any fossil fuel company or interest. I never have,” he added, a statement the university <a href="http://www.dailycamera.com/cu-news/ci_27593340/cu-boulders-roger-pielke-jr-says-congressman-is" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">backed up</a>.

Pielke rejects the label of climate skeptic but has questioned the notion that greenhouse gas emissions are connected to the increasing costs of natural disasters. He notes that he supports EPA’s climate regulations and has advocated a <a href="http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2010/10/interview-roger-pielke-jr-on-why-a-small-tax-is-our-best-hope-in-climate-change-fight/" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">small tax</a> on carbon emissions. Still, his views have made him a target for liberals, leading him to quickly <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/07/roger-pielke-jr-leaves-fivethirtyeight-192991.html" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">part ways</a> last year with the website FiveThirtyEight just a few months after its relaunch.

“Incessant attacks and smears are effective,” Pielke lamented this week.

Other researchers Grijalva is <a href="https://www.politicopro.com/f/?f=34750&inb" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">targeting</a> include David Legates of the University of Delaware, John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, Judith Curry of Georgia Tech and Richard Lindzen of MIT. Many of them reject the notion that they are climate change skeptics, although their work has drawn the attention of the skeptic camp. Christy, for example, <a href="http://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf/111/ctest.pdf" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">testified</a> before Congress that climate models overstate the atmosphere’s sensitivity to greenhouse gases, while Curry has <a href="http://www.npr.org/2013/08/22/213894792/uncertain-science-judith-currys-take-on-climate-change" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">maintained</a> that forecasting the climate is more uncertain that many scientists admit.

Curry took to her own blog to blast Grijalva’s request.

“I don’t think anything good will come of this,” she <a href="http://judithcurry.com/2015/02/25/conflicts-of-interest-in-climate-science/" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">wrote</a>. “I anticipate that Grijalva will not find any kind of an undisclosed fossil fuel smoking gun from any of the 7 individuals under investigation.”

Hayward, from Pepperdine, wrote on Power Line that he has received “no grants, honoraria, consulting fees, good karma baubles, or even Christmas cards from any fossil fuel interest, though I’d be proud and open about it if I did.” He also questioned the wisdom of judging scientists’ work based on who pays for the research.

“Is the good congressman really telling us that he is incapable of assessing factual claims and judgments about the wisdom of policy on the merits alone?” he wrote. “That doesn’t speak well of his probity.”

Even some groups that support acting on climate change have expressed worries that Grijalva’s questions may intrude on academic freedom. Michael Halpern of the Union of Concerned Scientists <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/what-kinds-of-scrutiny-of-scientists-are-legitimate-638" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">wrote</a> in a blog post that Grijalva’s questions about funding are appropriate, but said his request for drafts of congressional testimony amounts to an investigation into private communications.

“Just as I have supported universities’ efforts to protect communications among academics that constitute the research process, so, too, I see justification in protecting drafts of congressional testimony,” Halpern wrote.

The American Meteorological Society jumped into the fray Friday, <a href="http://www.ametsoc.org/sss/letter_on_challenges_to_academic_freedom_Feb15.pdf" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">writing</a> to Grijalva that “publicly singling out specific researchers based on perspectives they have expressed … sends a chilling message to all academic researchers.”

Mann, the former University of Virginia scientist, told <a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/democratic-congressman-draws-backlash-over-climate-funding-probe-20150225" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">National Journal</a> that Grijalva’s letter “does come across as sort of heavy handed and overly aggressive.”

Meanwhile, some climate-skeptic groups chose to mimic Grijalva’s probe by filing a similar request for information about University of Delaware climate scientist John Byrne.

“The sole distinctions are, first, that we far more narrowly tailor our request in comparison to Rep. Grijalva’s; second, our request is made pursuant to statutory authority,” <a href="http://eelegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/EELI-FME-Law-Delaware-Byrne-FOIA-request.pdf" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">wrote</a> the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic, the Energy & Environment Legal Institute and the Caesar Rodney Institute.

Read more: <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/climate-change-study-funding-raul-grijalva-115568.html#ixzz3TXnLkCMi" style="box-sizing: border-box; transition: all 0.25s ease; text-decoration: none;">http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/climate-change-study-funding-raul-grijalva-115568.html#ixzz3TXnLkCMi</a>

==

==

<div class="pullquote-right">Fossil-fuel-funded AEI fellow Steven Hayward has penned WSJ op-eds with titles like "No: Alternatives Are Simply Too Expensive."</div>

Other conservative think tanks have jumped in the clean-tech-bashing game, too. Take the American Enterprise Institute, recipient of at least $2.8 million in money from fossil-fuel interests like ExxonMobil since 1998. AEI fellow Steven Hayward has penned Wall Street Journal op-eds with titles like <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203440104574406673454653820.html">"No: Alternatives Are Simply Too Expensive."</a> [8] Then there's the Institute for Energy Research, an <a href="http://grist.org/article/2009-04-30-industry-front-group-goes/">industry aligned</a> [9] nonprofit that has taken money from Exxon and the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation, one of the Koch family foundations. The institute's president, Thomas Pyle, appeared in a January 2010 <a href="http://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Texas-is-in-line-to-get-clean-energy-tax-credits-1694015.php">Houston Chronicle article</a> [10] arguing that the government should not provide tax credits to renewable energy, because it's been proven that they are "not economically viable in the marketplace."...

In October 2011, Bryce did get some flack when an <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/08/opinion/08bryce.html">op-ed he wrote</a> [11] for the New York Times bashing California's clean-energy mandate failed to disclose that the Manhattan Institute is supported by oil and gas interests. Checks and Balances, along with a group of 50 journalists and journalism educators, <a href="http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/journos_call_for_more_transpar.php?page=all">launched a campaign</a> [12] in response, asking the Times to disclose any financial ties of op-ed contributors. The public editor responded with a column <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/opinion/sunday/the-times-gives-them-space-but-who-pays-them.html">calling for more transparency</a> [13] on contributors.

===

<h1 class="print-title" style=" margin-bottom: 0.2em;">Major News Outlets Give Fossil-Fuel-Funded Think Tanks a Free Platform</h1>

<div class="dek" style="margin-bottom: 0.5em;">National newspapers publish anti-green-energy articles—without disclosing that the authors work for industry-backed groups, a new study finds.</div>

By <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/authors/kate-sheppard" rel="author">Kate Sheppard</a> | Thu Dec. 13, 2012 3:03 AM PST

The fossil fuel industry has long been a source of talking points and "studies" aimed at spreading doubt about climate change, and over the past few years, it has broadened its scope to undermine support for clean energy, as well. Often, this criticism is published in the form of articles in major media outlets—penned by employees of think tanks who don't disclose their groups' industry funding, a new <a href="http://checksandbalancesproject.org/2012/12/12/report-fossil-fuel-front-groups-on-the-front-page/">study</a> [1] finds.

The <a href="http://checksandbalancesproject.org/">Checks and Balances Project</a> [2], a pro-clean-energy watchdog group, surveyed stories published over the past five years in 60 news outlets, including national and regional newspapers, the Associated Press, and Politico. Researchers found that only 6 percent of the stories disclosed the funding when they cited "experts" from those think tanks. Typically, the stories referred to the groups as "free-market" or "libertarian," without mentioning the dirty-energy support.

</div>

Among the most frequent op-ed contributors is Robert Bryce, a senior fellow with the <a href="http://www.manhattan-institute.org/">Manhattan Institute</a> [3], a think tank that has made promoting fossil fuels and downplaying climate change a central focus—and that has received $1.21 million in funding from the likes of ExxonMobil and <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/06/953240/-Who-is-this-Claude-R-Lambe">Claude R. Lambe</a> [4], a Koch-owned charitable organization. Bryce is quite deft at mowing down clean energy, which is probably why he's become a regular in the op-ed pages of the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, on TV, and speaking at events.

The Checks and Balances report notes that Manhattan Institute was mentioned 65 times in the papers it surveyed. That count includes pieces like Bryce's April 2010 <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/23/AR2010042302220.html">op-ed in the Washington Post</a> [5], "Five Myths About Green Energy," which includes lines like, "[I]n in the electric car's century-long history, failure tailgates failure." The piece describes Bryce as a senior fellow at Manhattan Institute, but doesn't mention the funding. Nor does his Wall Street Journal piece from August 2010, "Wind Power Won't Cool Down the Planet," which claims that increasing the use of wind will actually increase our emissions of carbon dioxide. Bryce also <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2010/0710/Six-lessons-from-the-BP-oil-spill/%28page%29/7">popped up in</a> [6] a Christian Science Monitor piece on lessons from the BP oil spill, arguing that nothing can compete with oil—again, with no indication that his organization has a dog in the fight. (Media Matters also <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2011/10/07/who-is-robert-bryce/181888">posted a piece in 2011</a> [7] that noted Bryce had made 39 different media appearances that failed to disclose the fossil fuel ties.)

<div class="pullquote-right">Fossil-fuel-funded AEI fellow Steven Hayward has penned WSJ op-eds with titles like "No: Alternatives Are Simply Too Expensive."</div>

Other conservative think tanks have jumped in the clean-tech-bashing game, too. Take the American Enterprise Institute, recipient of at least $2.8 million in money from fossil-fuel interests like ExxonMobil since 1998. AEI fellow Steven Hayward has penned Wall Street Journal op-eds with titles like <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203440104574406673454653820.html">"No: Alternatives Are Simply Too Expensive."</a> [8] Then there's the Institute for Energy Research, an <a href="http://grist.org/article/2009-04-30-industry-front-group-goes/">industry aligned</a> [9] nonprofit that has taken money from Exxon and the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation, one of the Koch family foundations. The institute's president, Thomas Pyle, appeared in a January 2010 <a href="http://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Texas-is-in-line-to-get-clean-energy-tax-credits-1694015.php">Houston Chronicle article</a> [10] arguing that the government should not provide tax credits to renewable energy, because it's been proven that they are "not economically viable in the marketplace."...<a href="http://www.motherjones.com/print/210806">http://www.motherjones.com/print/210806</a>

video IER Board Member, Steven Hayward, exposes how US energy policies have restricted access to America's vast energy resources. The result? America is less competitive in the world, energy prices are skyrocketing, and the economy is suffering. The United States must open federal lands to exploration and end the regulatory blockade that keeps shale oil and gas out of our reach. To read the North American Energy Inventory that Dr. Hayward's video is based on, go to: www.energyforamerica.org/inventory

</div>