Last week in Washington, D.C., a conference hosted by the Heartland Institute, a well-known climate-skeptic think tank, drew dozens of attendees promoting disputing views on climate change amid record-breaking global temperatures. The event took place as scientists confirmed that March 2026 was the hottest March ever recorded in the United States.

The gathering, held near the White House, was largely composed of middle-aged men dressed in business attire, many of whom expressed a narrative that the climate crisis is either exaggerated or nonexistent. Heartland Institute president James Taylor described the current moment as a victory for skeptics, stating that “the truth is winning out.” The conference’s keynote speaker was Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin, who framed the event as a “day to celebrate vindication” and criticized previous administrations for what he described as a “cabal” promoting climate science to advance an agenda. Reports also indicate that Zeldin is being considered for attorney general under President Donald Trump.

While a broad scientific consensus affirms that global warming is real, driven primarily by human activity, and poses an urgent threat, the conference speakers disputed these findings. Heartland Institute and co-sponsoring organizations such as the CO2 Coalition and the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) advanced messages asserting that carbon dioxide emissions are beneficial, renewable energy harms the environment, and climate science is politically motivated by left-wing actors. Conference materials included children’s books downplaying sea-level rise, buttons proclaiming pride in carbon footprints, and pamphlets challenging the “net zero” climate goal.

Taylor acknowledged a human role in climate change but rejected the framing of a “climate crisis,” highlighting a distinction he said is often conflated. Other presenters similarly denied the urgency or human cause of global warming. The groups represented at the conference enjoy considerable influence within the Trump administration, reversing standard climate policies. For instance, the repeal of the EPA’s “endangerment finding,” which underpins most U.S. climate regulations, was celebrated by conference attendees. In the past, representatives from these organizations have advised Trump on the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement and have been involved in drafting policy guides for a potential second term.

Despite the assertions made by conference participants, polling data shows that a majority of Americans, including a significant portion of young Republicans, acknowledge climate change as a serious issue. Taylor pointed to surveys indicating limited public willingness to pay for climate measures but acknowledged concerns over youth perspectives on the issue. A panel at the event addressed outreach to young people, advocating social media campaigns to counter mainstream climate activism.

The youth-focused panel was interrupted by activists from Climate Defiance, who staged a protest to contest the spread of climate denial messaging to younger generations. The protest was forcibly removed from the ballroom after vocal disruption. Organizers of the protest expressed concern that the predominantly older audience lacked direct stakes in future climate impacts and criticized the denial movement’s efforts to influence young audiences.

Critics of the Heartland Institute and allied groups highlight their longstanding financial support from major fossil fuel companies and political donors and characterize their activities as disseminating misinformation at odds with robust climate science. Harvard historian Naomi Oreskes noted that, while these groups portray themselves as marginalized, they wield significant power under the current administration, marking a shift from previous U.S. climate policy landscapes.