George C. Marshall Institute

Last updated
George C. Marshall Institute
Marshall Institute Logo.gif
Motto"Science for Better Public Policy"
Founder(s) Frederick Seitz, Robert Jastrow, William Nierenberg
Established1984;40 years ago (1984)
FocusEnergy, environmental, and defense policy
BudgetRevenue: $309,750
Expenses: $1,086,309
(FYE October 2015) [1]
Location
Arlington, Virginia
,
United States
DissolvedAugust 2015 (2015-08)

The George C. Marshall Institute (GMI) was a nonprofit conservative think tank in the United States. [2] It was established in 1984 with a focus on science and public policy issues and had an initial focus in defense policy. Starting in the late 1980s, the institute advocated for views in line with environmental skepticism, most notably climate change denial. [3] The think tank received extensive financial support from the fossil fuel industry. [3]

Contents

Though the institute officially closed in 2015, the climate-denialist CO2 Coalition is viewed as its immediate successor. GMI's defense research was absorbed by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. [4]

History

The George C. Marshall institute was founded in 1984 by Frederick Seitz (former President of the United States National Academy of Sciences), Robert Jastrow (founder of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies), and William Nierenberg (former director of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography). The institute's primary aim, initially, was to play a role in defense policy debates, defending Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI, or "Star Wars"). In particular, it sought to defend SDI "from attack by the Union of Concerned Scientists, and in particular by the equally prominent physicists Hans Bethe, Richard Garwin, and astronomer Carl Sagan." [5] The institute argued that the Soviet Union was a military threat. [5] A 1987 article by Jastrow [6] argued that in five years the Soviet Union would be so powerful that it would be able to achieve world domination without firing a shot. [5] When the Cold War instead ended in the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, the institute shifted from an emphasis on defense to a focus on environmental skepticism, including global warming denial. [5]

The institute's shift to environmental skepticism began with the publication of a report on global warming by William Nierenberg. During the 1988 United States presidential election, George H. W. Bush had pledged to meet the "greenhouse effect with the White House effect." [5] Nierenberg's report, which blamed global warming on solar activity, had a large impact on the incoming Bush presidency, strengthening those in it opposed to environmental regulation. [5] In 1990 the institute's founders (Jastrow, Nierenberg and Seitz) published a book on climate change. [7] The appointment of David Allan Bromley as presidential science advisor, however, saw Bush sign the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, despite some opposition from within his administration. [5]

In 1994, the institute published a paper by its then chairman, Frederick Seitz, titled Global warming and ozone hole controversies: A challenge to scientific judgment. Seitz questioned the view that CFCs "are the greatest threat to the ozone layer". [8] In the same paper, commenting on the dangers of secondary inhalation of tobacco smoke, he concluded "there is no good scientific evidence that passive inhalation is truly dangerous under normal circumstances." [9]

In 2012, the institute took over the responsibility for running the Missilethreat.com website from the Claremont Institute. Missilethreat.com aims to inform the American people of missile threats, thereby encouraging the deployment of a ballistic missile defense system. Since the closure of the institute, the Missilethreat.com website has been maintained by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. [10] [11]

Publications

Politicizing Science: The Alchemy of Policymaking is a book by the George C. Marshall Institute, edited by Michael Gough. The book, published in 2003, encourages a disinterested objectivity on the part of scientists and policymakers: Ideally, the scientists or analysts who generate estimates of harm that may result from a risk would consider all the relevant facts and alternative interpretations of the data, and remain skeptical about tentative conclusions. Ideally, too, the agency officials and politicians, who have to enact a regulatory program, would consider its costs and benefits, ensure that it will do more good than harm, and remain open to options to stop or change the regulation in situations where the underlying science is tentative. [12] [13]

Global warming

Starting in 1989 GMI was involved in what it terms "a critical examination of the scientific basis for global climate change policy." [14] This was described by Sharon Begley as a "central cog in the denial machine" in a 2007 Newsweek cover story on climate change denial. [15]

In Requiem for a Species , Clive Hamilton is critical of the Marshall Institute and contends that the conservative backlash against global warming research was led by three prominent physicists—Frederick Seitz, Robert Jastrow, and William Nierenberg, who founded the institute in 1984. According to Hamilton, by the 1990s the Marshall Institute's main activity was attacking climate science. [16] Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway reach a similar conclusion in Merchants of Doubt (2010), where they identified a few contrarian scientists associated with conservative think-tanks who fought the scientific consensus and spread confusion and doubt about global warming. [17] The book Climate Change: An Encyclopedia of Science and History, noting that GMI received funding from the automobile and fossil fuel industries and espouses "a mix of conservative, neoliberal, and libertarian ideological positions", states that GMI has "supported authors opposed to the hypothesis of anthropogenic warming and proposed mitigation policies ... stressing the free-market and the dangers of government regulation, which they said would hurt the US economy." [18]

GMI was one of only a few conservative environmental-policy think tanks to have natural scientists on staff. [19] Noted climate change deniers Sallie Baliunas and (until his death in 2008) Frederick Seitz (a past president of the National Academy of Sciences from 1962 to 1969) served on its board of directors. Patrick Michaels was a visiting scientist and Stephen McIntyre, Willie Soon and Ross McKitrick were contributing writers. [20] Richard Lindzen served on the institute's Science Advisory Board. [21]

In February 2005 GMI co-sponsored a congressional briefing at which Senator James Inhofe praised Michael Crichton's novel State of Fear and attacked the "hockey stick graph". [22]

William O'Keefe, chief executive officer of the Marshall Institute, questioned the methods used by advocates of new government restrictions to combat global warming: "We have never said that global warming isn't real. No self-respecting think tank would accept money to support preconceived notions. We make sure what we are saying is both scientifically and analytically defensible." [23]

Accusation of conflict of interest

Matthew B. Crawford was appointed executive director of GMI in September 2001. [24] He left the GMI after five months, saying that the institute was "fonder of some facts than others". He contended a conflict of interest existed in the funding of the institute. [25] In Shop Class as Soulcraft, he wrote about the institute that "the trappings of scholarship were used to put a scientific cover on positions arrived at otherwise. These positions served various interests, ideological or material. For example, part of my job consisted of making arguments about global warming that just happened to coincide with the positions taken by the oil companies that funded the think tank." [26]

In 1998 Jeffrey Salmon, then executive director of GMI, helped develop the American Petroleum Institute's strategy of stressing the uncertainty of climate science. [22]

Naomi Oreskes states that the institute, in order to resist and delay regulation, lobbied politically to create a false public perception of scientific uncertainty over the negative effects of second-hand smoke, the carcinogenic nature of tobacco smoking, the existence of acid rain, and on the evidence connecting CFCs and ozone depletion. [27]

Funding sources

Exxon-Mobil was a funder of the GMI until it pulled funding from it and several similar organizations in 2008. [28] From 1998 to 2008, the institute received a total of $715,000 in funding from Exxon-Mobil. [29]

See also

Related Research Articles

Environmental skepticism is the belief that statements by environmentalists, and the environmental scientists who support them, are false or exaggerated. The term is also applied to those who are critical of environmentalism in general. It can additionally be defined as doubt about the authenticity or severity of environmental degradation. Environmental skepticism is closely linked with anti-environmentalism and climate change denial. Environmental skepticism can also be the result of cultural and lived experiences.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fred Singer</span> Austrian-born American physicist (1924–2020)

Siegfried Fred Singer was an Austrian-born American physicist and emeritus professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia, trained as an atmospheric physicist. He was known for rejecting the scientific consensus on several issues, including climate change, the connection between UV-B exposure and melanoma rates, stratospheric ozone loss being caused by chlorofluoro compounds, often used as refrigerants, and the health risks of passive smoking.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Frederick Seitz</span> American physicist

Frederick Seitz was an American physicist, tobacco industry lobbyist, and climate change denier. Seitz was the 4th president of Rockefeller University from 1968 to 1978, and the 17th president of the National Academy of Sciences from 1962 to 1969. Seitz was the recipient of the National Medal of Science, NASA's Distinguished Public Service Award, and other honors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Scientific consensus on climate change</span> Evaluation of climate change by the scientific community

There is a nearly unanimous scientific consensus that the Earth has been consistently warming since the start of the Industrial Revolution, that the rate of recent warming is largely unprecedented, and that this warming is mainly the result of a rapid increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) caused by human activities. The human activities causing this warming include fossil fuel combustion, cement production, and land use changes such as deforestation, with a significant supporting role from the other greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide. This human role in climate change is considered "unequivocal" and "incontrovertible".

The Global Warming Petition Project, also known as the Oregon Petition, is a group which urges the United States government to reject the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 and similar policies. Their petition challenges the scientific consensus on climate change. Though the group claims more than thirty-thousand signatories across various scientific fields, the authenticity and methods of the petitioners as well as the signatories' credentials have been questioned, and the project has been characterized as a disinformation campaign engaged in climate change denial.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Robert Jastrow</span> American astronomer (1925–2008)

Robert Jastrow was an American astronomer and planetary physicist. He was a NASA scientist, populist author and futurist.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ross McKitrick</span> Canadian economist

Ross McKitrick is a Canadian economist specializing in environmental economics and policy analysis. He is a professor of economics at the University of Guelph, and a senior fellow of the Fraser Institute.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William Nierenberg</span> American physicist

William Aaron Nierenberg was an American physicist who worked on the Manhattan Project and was director of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography from 1965 through 1986. He was a co-founder of the George C. Marshall Institute in 1984.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Heartland Institute</span> Conservative and libertarian American think tank

The Heartland Institute is an American conservative and libertarian 501(c)(3) nonprofit public policy think tank known for denying the scientific consensus on climate change and the negative health impacts of smoking.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Naomi Oreskes</span> American historian of science

Naomi Oreskes is an American historian of science. She became Professor of the History of Science and Affiliated Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Harvard University in 2013, after 15 years as Professor of History and Science Studies at the University of California, San Diego.

<i>The Republican War on Science</i> 2005 book by Chris Mooney

The Republican War on Science is a 2005 book by Chris Mooney, an American journalist who focuses on the politics of science policy. In the book, Mooney discusses the Republican Party leadership's stance on science, and in particular that of the George W. Bush administration, with regard to issues such as climate change denialism, intelligent design, bioethics, alternative medicine, pollution, separation of church and state, and the government funding of education, research, and environmental protection. The book argues that the administration regularly distorted and/or suppressed scientific research to further its own political aims.

Friends of Science(FoS) is a non-profit advocacy organization based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. The organization rejects the established scientific consensus that humans are largely responsible for the currently observed global warming. Rather, they propose that "the Sun is the main direct and indirect driver of climate change," not human activity. They argued against the Kyoto Protocol. The society was founded in 2002 and launched its website in October of that year. They are largely funded by the fossil fuel industry.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Climate change denial</span> Denial of the scientific consensus on climate change

Climate change denial is a form of science denial characterized by rejecting, refusing to acknowledge, disputing, or fighting the scientific consensus on climate change. Those promoting denial commonly use rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of a scientific controversy where there is none. Climate change denial includes unreasonable doubts about the extent to which climate change is caused by humans, its effects on nature and human society, and the potential of adaptation to global warming by human actions. To a lesser extent, climate change denial can also be implicit when people accept the science but fail to reconcile it with their belief or action. Several studies have analyzed these positions as forms of denialism, pseudoscience, or propaganda.

<i>Merchants of Doubt</i> 2010 book by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway

Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming is a 2010 non-fiction book by American historians of science Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway. It identifies parallels between the global warming controversy and earlier controversies over tobacco smoking, acid rain, DDT, and the hole in the ozone layer. Oreskes and Conway write that in each case "keeping the controversy alive" by spreading doubt and confusion after a scientific consensus had been reached was the basic strategy of those opposing action. In particular, they show that Fred Seitz, Fred Singer, and a few other contrarian scientists joined forces with conservative think tanks and private corporations to challenge the scientific consensus on many contemporary issues.

<i>Requiem for a Species</i> Book by Clive Hamilton

Requiem for a Species: Why We Resist the Truth about Climate Change is a 2010 non-fiction book by Australian academic Clive Hamilton which explores climate change denial and its implications. It argues that climate change will bring about large-scale, harmful consequences for habitability for life on Earth including humans, which it is too late to prevent. Hamilton explores why politicians, corporations and the public deny or refuse to act on this reality. He invokes a variety of explanations, including wishful thinking, ideology, consumer culture and active lobbying by the fossil fuel industry. The book builds on the author's fifteen-year prior history of writing about these subjects, with previous books including Growth Fetish and Scorcher: The Dirty Politics of Climate Change.

The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) is a climate change denial advocacy organisation set up by S. Fred Singer's Science & Environmental Policy Project, and later supported by the Heartland Institute lobbying group, in opposition to the assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on the issue of global warming.

<i>Merchants of Doubt</i> (film) 2014 American documentary film by Robert Kenner

Merchants of Doubt is a 2014 American documentary film directed by Robert Kenner and inspired by the 2010 book of the same name by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway. The film traces the use of public relations tactics that were originally developed by the tobacco industry to protect their business from research indicating health risks from smoking. The most prominent of these tactics is the cultivation of scientists and others who successfully cast doubt on scientific results. Using a professional magician, the film explores the analogy between these tactics and the methods used by magicians to distract their audiences from observing how illusions are performed. For the tobacco industry, the tactics successfully delayed government regulation until long after the establishment of scientific consensus about the health risks from smoking. As its second example, the film describes how manufacturers of flame retardants worked to protect their sales after toxic effects of the retardants were reported in the scientific literature. The central concern of the film is the ongoing use of these tactics to forestall governmental action to regulate greenhouse gas emissions in response to the risks of global climate change.

<i>Climate Change Denial</i> 2011 book by Haydn Washington and John Cook

Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand is a 2011 non-fiction book about climate-change denial, coauthored by Haydn Washington and John Cook, with a foreword by Naomi Oreskes. Washington had a background in environmental science prior to authoring the work; Cook, educated in physics, founded (2007) the website Skeptical Science, which compiles peer-reviewed evidence of global warming. The book was first published in hardcover and paperback formats in 2011 by Earthscan, a division of Routledge.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">ExxonMobil climate change denial</span> Overview of climate-related ExxonMobil controversies

From the 1980s to mid 2000s, ExxonMobil was a leader in climate change denial, opposing regulations to curtail global warming. For example, ExxonMobil was a significant influence in preventing ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by the United States. ExxonMobil funded organizations critical of the Kyoto Protocol and seeking to undermine public opinion about the scientific consensus that global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Of the major oil corporations, ExxonMobil has been the most active in the debate surrounding climate change. According to a 2007 analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists, the company used many of the same strategies, tactics, organizations, and personnel the tobacco industry used in its denials of the link between lung cancer and smoking.

References

  1. ↑ "George C. Marshall Institute" (PDF). Foundation Center. 19 January 2016. Retrieved 27 February 2017.
  2. ↑ Cushman Jr., John (April 22, 1997). "Critics Rise Up Against Environmental Education". New York Times. Retrieved 28 December 2015.
  3. 1 2 Powell, James Lawrence (2011). The Inquisition of Climate Science. Columbia University Press. pp. 101–103. ISBN   9780231527842.
  4. ↑ Vaidyanathan, Gayathri (December 10, 2015). "Think tank that cast doubt on climate change science morphs into smaller one". E&E News . Retrieved 2023-09-01.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway, 10 August 2010, "Distorting Science While Invoking Science Archived 2010-09-19 at the Wayback Machine ", Science Progress
  6. ↑ Robert Jastrow, "America has Five Years Left!", National Review , Vol. 39, February 13, 1987
  7. ↑ Robert Jastrow, William Aaron Nierenberg, Frederick Seitz, Scientific perspectives on the greenhouse problem , Marshall Press, 1990
  8. ↑ "A Conversation with Dr. Frederick Seitz". The Marshall Institute. 1997-09-03. Archived from the original on 2010-07-06. Retrieved 2010-09-28.
  9. ↑ Hirschhorn, Norbert; Aguinaga Bialous, Stella (2001). "Second hand smoke and risk assessment: what was in it for the tobacco industry?". Tobacco Control. 10 (4): 375–382. doi:10.1136/tc.10.4.375. PMC   1747615 . PMID   11740031 . Retrieved 2 December 2019.
  10. ↑ "Announcing Missilethreat.com". Claremont Institute. 23 March 2004. Archived from the original on 16 January 2013. Retrieved 8 February 2013.
  11. ↑ "About Missilethreat.com". George C. Marshall Institute. Archived from the original on 15 January 2013. Retrieved 8 February 2013.
  12. ↑ Gough, Michael (January 1, 2003). "Politicizing Science: The Alchemy of Policymaking". Hoover Institution. Retrieved 28 December 2015.
  13. ↑ "New Books from Hoover Press, Politicizing Science: The Alchemy of Policymaking, Edited by Michael Gough". Business Wire. July 7, 2003. Retrieved 28 December 2015.
  14. ↑ 'Climate Change' Archived 2005-10-29 at the Wayback Machine webpage of George C. Marshall Institute website, Accessed March 2, 2008.
  15. ↑ Begley, Sharon (13 August 2007). "The Truth About Denial". Newsweek . Archived from the original on 21 October 2007. (MSNBC single page version, archived 20 August 2007)
  16. ↑ Hamilton, Clive (2010). Requiem for a Species: Why We Resist the Truth about Climate Change. Earthscan. p. 103. ISBN   978-1-84971-081-7.
  17. ↑ Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway (2010). Merchants of Doubt, Bloomsbury Press, pp. 8-9.
  18. ↑ Black, Brian (2013). Climate Change: An Encyclopedia of Science and History. ABC-CLIO. p. 1239. ISBN   9781598847611.
  19. ↑ Jacques, P.J.; Dunlap, R.E.; Freeman, M. (June 2008). "The organisation of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental scepticism". Environmental Politics. 17 (3): 349–385. Bibcode:2008EnvPo..17..349J. doi:10.1080/09644010802055576. S2CID   144975102.
  20. ↑ website Environmental Defense. Archived March 6, 2005, at the Wayback Machine
  21. ↑ McCright, Aaron M.; Dunlap, Riley E. (2003). "Defeating Kyoto: The Conservative Movement's Impact on U.S. Climate Change Policy" (PDF). Stanford University. Retrieved 2 December 2019.
  22. 1 2 Mooney, Chris (May–June 2005). "Some Like It Hot". Mother Jones . Retrieved March 2, 2008.
  23. ↑ "Global-warming skeptics cite being 'treated like a pariah'". The Washington Times. 11 February 2007. Retrieved 2 December 2019.
  24. ↑ "The appointment of Matthew B. Crawford to the position of Executive Director". George C. Marshall Institute. Archived from the original on 14 December 2001. Retrieved 2 December 2019.
  25. ↑ Mooney, Carolyn (7 June 2009). "A Hands-On Philosopher Argues for a Fresh Vision of Manual Work". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved 2 December 2019.
  26. ↑ Crawford, Matthew B. (2009). Shop Class as Soulcraft. Penguin Press. ISBN   978-1594202230.
  27. ↑ Oreskes, Naomi (2007). The American Denial of Global Warming (starting at 30:30 minutes into speech) (Speech). Retrieved 27 February 2017.
  28. ↑ Anjana Ahuja and Mark Henderson "Times Cheltenham Science Festival celebrates scientific heresy ", The Times, May 30, 2009. [ dead link ]
  29. ↑ Ed Pilkington (2008-09-30). "Palin fought safeguards for polar bears with studies by climate change sceptics". The Guardian. Retrieved 2010-09-28.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.