Science-Based Climate Change Denial: Manufacturing Doubt in the Age of Collapse

Despite overwhelming scientific consensus that human activity—especially the burning of fossil fuels—is the primary driver of climate change, a sophisticated form of climate change denial persists, often cloaked in the language and authority of science itself. This “science-based” climate change denial does not simply reject climate science outright but instead cherry-picks data, emphasizes uncertainties, and amplifies marginal scientific viewpoints to cast doubt on established facts. At the center of this strategy are credentialed scientists, industry-funded think tanks, and academic institutions that provide intellectual cover for the continued exploitation of fossil fuels.

This form of denialism has proved highly effective in delaying climate action, muddying public understanding, and influencing policy—especially in the United States, where partisan politics, neoliberal economic ideology, and extractive capitalism intersect.

The Evolution of Denialism

In the 1990s, outright climate change denial was more common, with prominent voices denying that the Earth was warming or that human activity played any role. But as evidence mounted—through rising global temperatures, melting ice caps, and increasingly destructive weather events—climate denial evolved. Rather than deny global warming altogether, many so-called skeptics now argue that climate models are unreliable, that warming is not necessarily dangerous, or that adaptation is more cost-effective than mitigation.

This shift gave rise to a subtler, more insidious strategy: science-based denial. Unlike conspiracy theories or fringe pseudoscience, this form of denial often involves credentialed experts, peer-reviewed articles (sometimes in low-quality or ideologically driven journals), and selective interpretation of data to mislead the public and stall regulatory action.

Scientists for Hire

Think tanks like the Heartland Institute, Cato Institute, and George C. Marshall Institute have employed scientists with impressive resumes to lend credibility to denialist arguments. Figures like Willie Soon, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, have received funding from fossil fuel interests like ExxonMobil and Southern Company while publishing papers that downplay human contributions to climate change. These financial ties are often undisclosed or downplayed, even though they present a clear conflict of interest.

In some cases, these scientists present themselves as heroic dissenters—mavericks standing up against a corrupt, alarmist scientific establishment. Their arguments are rarely about disproving the reality of climate change, but instead about inflating uncertainties, misrepresenting data, or offering misleading counter-examples that are unrepresentative of broader trends.

The Role of Higher Education

Elite universities and academic journals have sometimes unwittingly enabled science-based denial by embracing a culture of both-sides-ism and neutrality in the face of coordinated disinformation campaigns. In the name of academic freedom, universities have tolerated or even elevated voices that promote denialist rhetoric under the guise of “healthy skepticism.”

Institutions like George Mason University’s Mercatus Center and Stanford University’s Hoover Institution have provided intellectual homes for scholars funded by fossil fuel interests. These institutions maintain the veneer of academic legitimacy while promoting deregulatory, pro-fossil fuel policy agendas.

Furthermore, federal and state funding for climate research has become increasingly politicized, especially under Republican administrations. Under the Trump administration (2017–2021), federal agencies were directed to scrub climate change from reports and suppress scientific findings. Even now, with the potential return of Trump-style governance, science-based denialists are preparing for a resurgence.

Strategic Misinformation

Climate denial campaigns use sophisticated media strategies to manipulate public opinion. Through platforms like Fox News, right-wing podcasts, and social media channels, science-based denial is disseminated to millions. The denialists often invoke “Climategate”—a 2009 scandal involving hacked emails from climate scientists—as proof of corruption in climate science, despite multiple investigations clearing the scientists of wrongdoing.

The playbook is familiar: exaggerate uncertainty, cherry-pick cold weather events, blame solar activity, and discredit prominent climate scientists like Michael Mann or James Hansen. The public, already overwhelmed with crises, becomes confused, disoriented, or apathetic.

Consequences and Countermeasures

The consequences of science-based climate denial are devastating. Delayed action has led to rising sea levels, record heatwaves, agricultural disruption, and biodiversity collapse. Vulnerable communities, particularly in the Global South and marginalized communities in the U.S., bear the brunt of the damage.

To counter this, scholars and educators must move beyond “debating” denialists and instead expose the ideological and financial underpinnings of their arguments. As Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway showed in Merchants of Doubt, denialism is not a scientific disagreement—it is a political and economic strategy designed to protect powerful interests.

The Higher Education Inquirer supports open scientific inquiry, but not at the expense of truth or the planet. Universities, journalists, and the public must hold denialists accountable and challenge the structures that enable them—especially those in academic robes who lend their credentials to oil-funded propaganda.

---

Reliable Sources and Further Reading:

• Oreskes, Naomi, and Erik M. Conway. Merchants of Doubt. Bloomsbury Press, 2010.

• Brulle, Robert J. “Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations.” Climatic Change, vol. 122, no. 4, 2014, pp. 681–694.

• Dunlap, Riley E., and Aaron M. McCright. “Organized climate change denial.” The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society, Oxford University Press, 2011.

• Mann, Michael E. The New Climate War: The Fight to Take Back Our Planet. PublicAffairs, 2021.

• Union of Concerned Scientists. "The Climate Deception Dossiers." 2015. https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/climate-deception-dossiers

• Inside Climate News. “Exxon: The Road Not Taken.” https://insideclimatenews.org/news/15092015/exxon-the-road-not-taken/

• Climate Investigations Center. “Tracking the Climate Denial Machine.” https://climateinvestigations.org

---

For inquiries, reprint permissions, or to contribute your own investigations, contact The Higher Education Inquirer at gmcghee@aya.yale.edu.

Elite Universities Spending on Federal Political Action, 2023-2024 (Open Secrets)

Contributor            To Dems      To Repubs University of California $10,745,074 $313,569 Stanford University $3,687,300 $159,768 Harvard University $2,828,550 $202,101 Johns Hopkins University $2,465,360 $131,415 Columbia University $2,053,121 $95,261 University of Washington $2,302,341 $34,299 University of Michigan $2,227,868 $76,302 University of Wisconsin $1,877,299 $94,443 University of Pennsylvania $1,836,139 $55,099 Emory University $1,699,270 $45,728 Yale University $1,784,524 $48,051 MIT $1,603,687 $66,848 University of Texas            $1,587,068 $223,559 California State University        $1,583,386 $54,289 University Of Maryland $1,366,021 $58,397 City University of New York $1,251,393 $78,500 Duke University $1,389,024 $59,009 University of Minnesota $1,396,156 $84,309 New York University $1,362,514 $66,195 Tufts University $878,251 $8,170

Before the Movement: The Hidden History of Black Civil Rights (Dylan C. Penningroth)

From the Stanford Humanities Center: 

As part of our online Inside the Center series, Dylan C. Penningroth, a 2013–14 SHC fellow, discusses his latest book, "Before the Movement: The Hidden History of Black Civil Rights." Joining him in conversation is historian and Stanford professor James T. Campbell. Through an empirically rich historical investigation into the changing meaning of civil rights, "Before the Movement" seeks to change the way we think about Black history itself. Weaving together a variety of sources—from state and federal appellate courts to long-forgotten documents found in county courthouse basements, from family interviews to church records—the book tries to reveal how African Americans thought about, talked about, and used the law long before the marches of the 1960s. In a world that denied their constitutional rights, Black people built lives for themselves through common law “rights of everyday use.”

Wealth and Want Part 1: Multi-Billion Dollar Endowments

US higher education reflects and reinforces a world of increasing inequality, injustice, and inhumanity. This system (or some would call it an industry) should function as a conduit between good K-12 education, good jobs, and the wellness of all its citizens, whether they attend or not. But increasingly, it does not. 

The first installments of the Wealth and Want series examine the concentration of wealth in the US higher education system.  And this article focuses on loosely regulated university endowments. While many American schools struggle to provide basic amenities and academic resources, elite universities boast endowments that rival the GDPs of small nations. And they pay little in taxes. 

The Endowment Elite and Ill-Gotten Gains

At the pinnacle of higher education wealth are Harvard ($49B), The University of Texas System ($44B), Yale ($40B), Stanford ($36B), and Princeton ($34B). These institutions have amassed endowments that provide a steady stream of income for investments, scholarships, and research initiatives. How their money is invested is rarely known.  

Endowment managers at elite schools typically make more than a million dollars a year. The most elite schools pay their managers $5M-$10M a year, with compensation largely based on returns. But those managers still get hefty salaries even when they lose money.

There are more than 120 schools with endowments greater than a billion dollars. But the 20 richest university endowments together hold more wealth than the other 5000 or so other higher education institutions combined. 

Elite endowments are often the result of centuries of fundraising, donations, and strategic (sometimes shady) investments. For many of the most prestigious schools, it began with land theft and generations of forced labor. 

For other wealthy schools, it was the result of philanthropic robber barons like Johns Hopkins (who also held captives), Andrew Carnegie, Leland Stanford, John D. Rockefeller, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and James Buchanan Duke who made their wealth through mass exploitation of people and the planet. 

For wealthy flagship state universities, it also came from land theft. In the case of the University of Texas, its wealth largely came from, and to some degree still comes from the exploitation of fossil fuels that jeopardize the planet.

Historical Context and Structural Inequality

• Land Theft and the Founding of Institutions: The establishment of many American universities, including Ivy League institutions and those founded under the Morrill Act, was often intertwined with land theft from Native American tribes. This practice, often referred to as "land dispossession" or "Indian removal," was a key component of Manifest Destiny and the expansion of European settlement across the continent.
• Ivy League Universities: Institutions like Harvard, Yale, and Columbia were granted land by colonial governments, which often acquired these lands through treaties that were coerced or violated. They also used enslaved labor to build and maintain their wealth.  
• Funding Models: The funding models for public higher education often favor larger, research-intensive universities. This can lead to underfunding for smaller, less prestigious institutions, particularly those serving marginalized communities.
• Endowment Inequality and Profits Over People and Planet: Endowments are a powerful tool for wealth accumulation and institutional advantage. The concentration of endowments in a few elite universities can exacerbate existing inequalities and create a self-perpetuating cycle of privilege.  These endowments have also engaged in shady investments that perpetuated worker oppression, genocide, and environmental destruction. 

Related links:

Pay and Chief Investment Officers: Good Money while It Lasts

Tax Wealthy Private Universities Now (Paul Prescod, Jacobin)

Socrates in Space: University of Austin as a Model of America's Ivory Tower Future

The University of Austin's inaugural class begins this September. While its founding has had some media attention, critical and uncritical, little is known about the school, other than its founders and some of the curriculum--and more recently about the school's constitution and austere, free market business model. We expect the public to receive information akin to propaganda from the new university while investigative reporters attempt to find what's really developing.  

Tomorrowland's Elite Model

The US has had three major growth periods in elite higher education with the founding of Christian-based Ivy League schools in the 17th and 18th centuries, the rise of more private colleges in the 19th century, and the evolution of state flagship universities in the 20th century, which altered their missions from teaching to focus more on research and medicine.

According to President Pano Kanelos, the University of Austin (UATX) is modeled after elite schools founded by the money of 19th century capitalists: Johns Hopkins University, the University of Chicago (John D. Rockefeller), and Stanford University. In its original plan, the school is seeking accreditation but not public funding. And without federal funding, the school is not required to be transparent on a number of issues, including finances, student demographics, and crime statistics. A limited amount of information will be available on the institution's IRS 990 forms.

UATX's leaders see the school as a model for elite education in the 21st century and beyond: socializing future elites in neo-classical western thought and the search of the truth as they know it: through the lens of US venture capitalists and US private equity. The school's donors include Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale who created the start up funds for UATX, real estate investor Harlan Crow, and global real estate investor Scott Malkin.  

Despite its calling for intellectual diversity, the University of Austin will serve as a safe space for conservative and libertarian youth, especially young men: blind to race, class, and gender, and friendly to those who may feel intimidated by progressive folks and the recent pro-Palestinian movement on elite campuses. UATX will be attuned to the needs of private capital and the promotion of their ventures and the ventures of their allies: from bitcoin, to artificial intelligence, to private space exploration. 

Command and Control

At the University of Austin, there will be no faculty senate and no faculty tenure. The initial faculty roster is composed of 19 men and 4 women--and appears to be disproportionately white. Staff and support roles will be done largely by artificial intelligence and workers in Guatemala.   

 

Artificial Intelligence will be used to reduce labor costs at the University of Austin. 

Prospective students will selected by the faculty and on merit, which includes standardized test scores. Those who matriculate will learn classical and neoclassical western philosophy (like Socrates and the Federalist Papers) and English Literature in combination with science and engineering, where all students will take the same coursework for the first two years, then become research fellows in the remaining two years, with each student involved in practically solving "a major political, social or economic problem...by the time they graduate."

Students will share apartments off campus where they will do their own cooking. There will be no amenities on campus or campus police, but local gyms and local police will be in the area. Aside from the Austin Union, the student body is expected to start their own clubs and activities. The physical library is a small room with a few bookshelves, and the librarian has additional duties. Civil debate is encouraged, but campus protests will be limited--it is said, to protect the rights of all students. 

The founding 2024 class is expected to enroll 100 students, growing to 200 students in 2025 and 1,000 students in 2028, reaching a peak of 4,000, and with a new campus. After the founding class, which will receive free tuition for four years, tuition is expected to be about $32,500 per year, with a number of students receiving scholarships.

Related links:

The Constitution of Academic Liberty (Niall Ferguson, National Affairs)

Can the New University of Austin Revive the Culture of Inquiry in Higher Education? (Joanne Jacobs, Education Next)

An American Education: Notes from UATX (Noah Rawlings, The New Inquiry)

Austin’s Anti-Woke University Is Living in Dreamland (Morgan O'Hanlon)

The Future of Publicly-Funded University Hospitals (Dahn Shaulis and Glen McGhee)

A People's History of Higher Education in the US?

Dangerous Spaces: Sexual Assault and Other Forms of Violence On and Off Campus