I think this opinion piece scores very low in terms of evaluating Trump's overall science policy.  Hager confuses global-warming-related studies with all of science.  Lot's of federal money is being wasted on global-warming-related pseudo science.  Hager could have made a stronger argument for his point if, for example, he had identified just one concrete result produced during the ARPA-E energy summit meeting whose demise he laments.   Yeah, Hager (like Bob Doppelt) likes to burn jet fuel to attend big hoola climate-change-related conferences, but what good do they do.  Hager should rethink his argument.  Focus on the concrete.  I expect that Trump is a great supporter of all science related to opening new horizons, to improving products, computers, etc.  Trump may be opposed to spending endless billions on quixotic climate change research.  Doesn't mean he doesn't support science more generally.