Climate Denier William Happer: CO2 “Demonized like Jews”.
July 17, 2014
“The demonization of carbon dioxide is just like the demonization of the poor Jews under Hitler,” said Princeton University professor William Happer while being interviewed on “Squawk Box” on CNBC. Before host Andrew Ross Sorkin could respond in incredulity, Happer went on to say, “Carbon dioxide is actually a benefit to the world, and so were the Jews.”
Happer was introduced as an expert on climate change, despite there being no proof that he is one. When ExxonMobil donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Happer’s organization, the Marshall Institute, they probably didn’t expect him to make such haphazard comments.
Dr. Happer has been Chairman of the Board of the Marshall Institute, which, among other initiatives, has denied the threat of global climate change, and, regular readers will not be surprised, fought against stronger regulations on the tobacco industry. Consider Dr. Happer’s credibility in light of the following.
In 1989 at the same time it began a “Climate Change Policy Program,” the Marshall Institute released a report arguing that “cyclical variations in the intensity of the sun would offset any climate change associated with elevated greenhouse gases.” Although it was refuted by the IPCC, the report was used by the Bush Sr. Administration to argue for a more lenient climate change policy.
GMI has since published a series of reports and articles that attempt to discredit mainstream climate science and undermine climate change legislation such as the Kyoto Protocol.
The Marshall Institute’s “Climate Change Policy” program was started in 1989 as a “critical examination of the scientific basis for global climate change policy.” Notably, “A major component of this effort is communicating the findings to policy makers, the media and the public policy community.” 
In a 2009 essay, former Executive Director Matthew B. Crawford had this to say about his initial experience with the Marshall Institute (emphasis added):
“… certain perversities became apparent as I settled into the job. It sometimes required me to reason backward, from desired conclusion to suitable premise. The organization had taken certain positions, and there were some facts it was more fond of than others. As its figurehead, I was making arguments I didn’t fully buy myself. Further, my boss seemed intent on retraining me according to a certain cognitive style — that of the corporate world, from which he had recently come. This style demanded that I project an image of rationality but not indulge too much in actual reasoning.” 
Newsweek has described GMI as a “central cog in the denial machine,” and Naomi Oreskes has said that the Institute has lobbied politically to create a false 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 between CFCs and ozone depletion. , 
- Brady Education Foundation — $1,000
- Carthage Foundation — $707,500
- Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation — $30,000
- Earhart Foundation — $270,000
- Exxon Mobil — $640,000
- John M. Olin Foundation — $350,000
- Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation — $3,700,303
- Sarah Scaife Foundation — $3,270,000