The Discovery Institute is intellectually dishonest and wrong.

For an example, see this wonderful article: What Do Darwinism and 'Climate Change' Have in Common? Correct answer: they're both true and the best explanation of the evidence.

It's one thing to be invested in creationism and reject modern evolutionary theory because of it. But their slip is showing: they're just movement conservatives coming to their predetermined conclusion rather than following the evidence. The confirmation bias is strong here. This is not the only such article from them trying to cast aspersions on global warming.

One may object that here they're only comparing the rhetoric of the two rather than claiming global warming isn't happening. But... why? This isn't some isolated thought exercise or examination of rhetoric in a neutral setting. They disagree with Darwinism, their audience disagrees with Darwinism, they're comparing anthropogenic climate change to Darwinism, and their audience is already inclined to disagree with anthropogenic climate change. As a matter of rhetoric - which is what they're looking at - the implication is clear: "Maybe you shouldn't trust these science-talking guys on this as much, either."

There's some crazy stuff in the old Ron Paul newsletters.

I mean, CRAZY. Not just run-of-the-mill "Judenhass" and anti-black dog whistles. Shockingly, it gets crazier than that. Not to mention the explicit decision to go "Southern Strategy" with it - run racist with the hopes of attracting, let's make no bones about this, the more racist elements of society. After a couple decades of this, Dr Paul apparently realized it was going to be a better idea... not to explicitly appeal to racists. This only left the weird batshit conspiratorial aspects of the worldview with only hints of the dog whistle to it.

In short, I don't really have much respect for people who have much respect for Dr Ron Paul. At least, not if they know anything about him.