Kevin Dayaratna

Kevin Dayaratna

Credentials

  • Ph.D. Mathematical Statistics, University of Maryland, College Park (2014)
  • 1Kevin Dayaratna,” George Washington University Columbian College of Arts and Sciences. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/DlTE9
  • M.A. Mathematical Statistics, University of Maryland, College Park (2011)
  • 2Kevin Dayaratna,” George Washington University Columbian College of Arts and Sciences. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/DlTE9
  • M.S. Business and Management, University of Maryland, College Park (2008)
  • 3Kevin Dayaratna,” George Washington University Columbian College of Arts and Sciences. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/DlTE9
  • B.A. Applied Mathematics, University of California, Berkeley (2005)
  • 4Kevin Dayaratna,” George Washington University Columbian College of Arts and Sciences. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/DlTE9 Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/DlTE9

Background

Kevin Dayaratna is chief statistician and data scientist and a senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis, where he “specializes in tax, energy, and health policy issues.”5Kevin Dayaratna,The Heritage Foundation. Archived March 31, 2023. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/ttcKJ

According to his Heritage Foundation profile, Dayaratna began working at the organization in 2012 as a graduate fellow in health policy.6Kevin Dayaratna,” The Heritage Foundation. Archived March 31, 2023. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/ttcKJ

Regarding energy and climate data analysis, according to his profile:7Kevin Dayaratna,” The Heritage Foundation. Archived March 31, 2023. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/ttcKJ

“During President Obama’s second term, Dayaratna found a major flaw in the administration’s climate modeling that forced the administration to open up this entire class of modeling to public comment. His continued work on this and other related areas constituted the basis for a number of major policy decisions made by the Trump administration as well. Dayaratna’s expertise on energy modeling has also been utilized by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which he has aided to consider analyzing energy policies using the same tools he uses at Heritage.”

Dayaratna helped formulate the “Heritage Energy Model” (HEM), which Heritage describes as “a clone of the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s National Energy Model.” The Heritage Foundation uses the model as a basis for commentaries on and analyses of energy policies.8“Kevin D. Rayaratna, PhD, and Nicolas D. Loris. “Assessing the Costs and Benefits of the Green New Deal’s Energy Policies,” The Heritage Foundation Center for Data Analysis, July 24, 2019. Archived March 31, 2023. Archive URL: https://archive.ph/wip/4pnRj

Kevin Dayaratna is also a professorial lecturer in the Department of Mathematics at George Washington University, Columbian College of Arts and Sciences,9Kevin Dayaratna,” George Washington University Columbian College of Arts and Sciences. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/DlTE9, and a senior statistician and research programmer at the Heartland Institute..10Kevin Dayaratna,” The Heartland Institute. Archived March 31, 2023. Archive URL: https://archive.ph/wip/DCF6J

Stance on Climate Change

March 22, 2023

Kevin Dayaratna and Travis Fisher co-authored a Heritage Foundation commentary on a New Jersey offshore wind power initiative, criticizing the plan’s fractional impact on climate change while ignoring the larger context of cumulative action at a national or international scale:11Travis Fisher and Kevin Dayaratna. “New Jersey’s $8,000-per-resident Wind Energy Scheme Won’t Reduce Climate Change,” The Heritage Foundation commentary, March 22, 2023. Archived April 4, 2023. Archive URL: https://archive.is/wip/Gowtp

“The wind turbines these funds would finance would not meaningfully reduce global temperatures. Even if New Jersey’s entire electricity sector stopped emitting greenhouse gases today, our estimates in The Heritage Foundation Center for Data Analysis (using a U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate simulator model) indicate the temperature reduction would be no more than 0.0003 degrees Celsius by 2050 and 0.0007 degrees Celsius by 2100. (The Daily Signal is the news and commentary website of The Heritage Foundation.)

“So why move forward? The mandated buildout of offshore wind in New Jersey is a political scheme for Murphy to earn glowing headlines and enrich his friends at foreign green energy companies at the expense of unwitting residents. Actions this misleading and harmful to the state could rightly be characterized as fraud if they weren’t being done with the legal backing of the state Legislature.

“But it’s not just New Jersey. The same story is playing out across the country: Anyone who doesn’t submit to net-zero carbon emissions schemes will be coerced.”

June 16, 2022

In a report for The Heritage Foundation on the Biden administration’s climate policies, co-authors Kevin Dayaratna, Katie Tubb and David Kreutzer stated:12Kevin Dayaratna, Katie Tubb, and David Kreutzer. “The Unsustainable Costs of President Biden’s Climate Agenda,” The Heritage Foundation report, June 16, 2022. Archived September 3, 2022. Archive URL: https://archive.ph/c6nhC

“While the Paris Agreement’s climate impact will be minimal at best (even when assuming that the signatory countries follow through on their commitments), the policies implemented by the Biden Administration to reach its intended targets will impose significant costs on American families and businesses. Americans are struggling under high inflation, exacerbated by record-high energy prices. Prohibiting and restricting the use of natural resources while subsidizing and mandating alternatives will only further increase energy costs. This is perhaps the greatest weakness of the Paris Agreement—while rejecting resources that meet most of the world’s energy needs, the Paris Agreement has yet to address the growing energy needs around the world. Energy is essential to peoples’ health, well-being, and economic opportunity and has been a key driver in the dramatic decrease in mortality and extreme poverty over the past century.”

March 2, 2021

In a Heritage Foundation commentary, Kevin Dayaratna stated,

“Although the social cost of carbon is based on an interesting class of statistical models, no matter what estimate the Biden administration provides, the assumptions used to generate it can almost surely be manipulated to give lawmakers virtually any other (even negative) estimate of the social cost of carbon, thereby predicting anything, ranging from little warming and continued prosperity to catastrophic warming and immense disaster.”

July 24, 2019

The Heritage Foundation published a policy analysis titled, “Assessing the Costs and Benefits of the Green New Deal’s Energy Policies,” co-authored by Kevin Dayaratna and Nicolas Loris. The co-authors claimed their analysis “demonstrates how economically damaging the energy components of the Green New Deal would be for American families and businesses—all for no meaningful impact on the climate.”13Kevin D. Rayaratna, PhD, and Nicolas D. Loris. “Assessing the Costs and Benefits of the Green New Deal’s Energy Policies,” The Heritage Foundation Center for Data Analysis, July 24, 2019. Archived March 31, 2023. Archive URL: https://archive.ph/wip/4pnRj

Selected quotes from the document:14Kevin D. Rayaratna, PhD, and Nicolas D. Loris. “Assessing the Costs and Benefits of the Green New Deal’s Energy Policies,” The Heritage Foundation Center for Data Analysis, July 24, 2019. Archived March 31, 2023. Archive URL: https://archive.ph/wip/4pnRj

“The Green New Deal is much more than just an energy and climate policy; it is a plan to fundamentally restructure the American economy. As stated in the non-binding resolution, ‘climate change, pollution, and environmental destruction have exacerbated systemic racial, regional, social, environmental, and economic injustices.’ To correct those alleged injustices, the plan aims to change how people consume energy, develop crops, construct homes, and produce and transport goods. In other words, the government would use taxes and regulations to control actions and choices made by everyday Americans.

[…]

“The Green New Deal would amount to more centralization of power in Washington where the government would determine what type of energy Americans produce and consume. Congress should prevent unelected regulators from misleading the public on the “climate benefits” of greenhouse-gas
regulations. Furthermore, policymakers should put forth policy improvements that will drive innovation among all forms of energy. Breaking down barriers to competition, freeing up innovative pathways for new technologies, and freely trading energy technologies will meet America’s and the world’s energy needs while helping the environment.”

June 2, 2017

In a press release titled, “Heritage Research Impacts Trump’s Decision to Withdraw from Paris Climate Deal,” the Heritage Foundation claimed some credit for the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. The released noted that in a speech delivered on his 100th day in office, President Donald Trump referenced information from a 2016 Heritage Foundation report co-authored by Kevin Dayaratma:15Heritage Research Impacts Trump’s Decision to Withdraw From Paris Climate Deal,” The Heritage Foundation, June 2, 2017. Archived February 7, 2018. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/HrfiD

“It is estimated that for compliance with the agreement could ultimately shrink America’s GDP by $2.5 trillion over a 10-year period.”16Heritage Research Impacts Trump’s Decision to Withdraw From Paris Climate Deal,The Heritage Foundation, June 2, 2017. Archived February 7, 2018. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/HrfiD

April 22, 2016

The Heritage Foundation published a report titled, “The State of Climate Science: No Justification for Extreme Policies,” co-authored by David Kreutzer, Nicolas Loris, Katie Tubb, and Kevin Dayaratna. The report begins: “Hysteria over global warming is now pervasive in the federal government, driving not just the Obama Administration’s energy and environmental policies, but also those of nearly every federal agency.”17David Kreutzer, Nicolas Loris, Katie Tubb, and Kevin Dayaratna. “The State of Climate Science: No Justification for Extreme Policies,” The Heritage Foundation, April 22, 2016. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/02ZBk

Selected quotes from the report:18David Kreutzer, Nicolas Loris, Katie Tubb, and Kevin Dayaratna. “The State of Climate Science: No Justification for Extreme Policies,” The Heritage Foundation, April 22, 2016. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/02ZBk

“The idea that the science of climate change is ‘settled’ is an absurdity, contrary to the very spirit of scientific enquiry. 

[…]

“Dire predictions for both global cooling and global warming have been found to be grossly inaccurate. The science may be settled that man-made emissions have had some impact on the earth’s temperature, but the consensus stops there.

…]

“Dr. Judith Curry recently compared five data sets of global temperatures and found that all but one show the warming trend has been essentially flat for various periods exceeding 10 years in length during the past 18 years. More specifically, the observed climate data show a significant moderation of the warming trend over the past two decades. In fact, depending on the endpoints chosen, recent warming has been modest or even negative (slight cooling).”

April 13, 2016

The Heritage Foundation published a report co-authored by Kevin Dayaratna, Nicolas Loris, and David Kreutzer, titled “Consequences of Paris Protocol: Devastating Economic Costs, Essentially Zero Environmental Benefits.” According to the report, the co-authors “used the Heritage Energy Model (HEM), a clone of the National Energy Modeling System 2015 Full Release (NEMS), to quantify the economic impact of instituting the regulations associated with the policies stemming from the Paris agreement.”19Kevin Dayaratna, Nicolas Loris, and David Kreutzer. “Consequences of Paris Protocol: Devastating Economic Costs, Essentially Zero Environmental Benefits,” The Heritage Foundation, April 13, 2016. Archived February 8, 2019. Archive URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20190208042414/https://www.heritage.org/environment/report/consequences-paris-protocol-devastating-economic-costs-essentially-zero

Dayaratna, Loris, and Kreutzer argued that “carbon-dioxide-emitting fuels, such as coal, oil, and natural gas, provided 87 percent of America’s energy needs in the past decade, and have been the overwhelming supplier for over a century. Restricting the use of conventional energy sources as laid out by the Obama Administration’s INDC will significantly harm the U.S. economy.”20Kevin Dayaratna, Nicolas Loris, and David Kreutzer. “Consequences of Paris Protocol: Devastating Economic Costs, Essentially Zero Environmental Benefits,” The Heritage Foundation, April 13, 2016. Archived February 8, 2019. Archive URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20190208042414/https://www.heritage.org/environment/report/consequences-paris-protocol-devastating-economic-costs-essentially-zero “INDC” refers to the “intended nationally determined contribution” of carbon emission reductions under the Paris Agreement.

The report concluded:21Kevin Dayaratna, Nicolas Loris, and David Kreutzer. “Consequences of Paris Protocol: Devastating Economic Costs, Essentially Zero Environmental Benefits,” The Heritage Foundation, April 13, 2016. Archived February 8, 2019. Archive URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20190208042414/https://www.heritage.org/environment/report/consequences-paris-protocol-devastating-economic-costs-essentially-zero

“Heritage’s clone of the Energy Information Administration’s energy model shows that restricting energy production to meet targets like those of the Paris agreement will significantly harm the U.S. economy. Bureaucratically administered mandates, taxes, and special interest subsidies will drive family incomes down by thousands of dollars per year, drive up energy costs, and eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs. All of these costs would be incurred to achieve only trivial and theoretical impacts on global warming. Policymakers should therefore make every effort possible to prevent implementation of these harmful environmental regulations.”

Key Quotes

November 9, 2017

Speaking at the Heartland Institute’s “America First Energy Conference,” Kevin Dayaratna delivered a presentation called “Peace Dividend: Benefits of Ending the War on Fossil Fuels.” Dayaratna criticized the Obama’s administration’s support for the Clean Power Plan, the Paris Agreement, and a carbon tax. Dayaratna also praised President Trump for his pledge to roll back environmental regulations on carbon emissions.22Videos – Kevin Dayaratna, AFEC (Panel 3b: Peace Dividend: Benefits Of Ending The War On Fossil Fuels),” The Heartland Institute, December 3, 2017. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/KQbVY. Archived .mp4 on file at DeSmog.

Downplaying the long-term economic and environmental effects of carbon dioxide emissions, Dayaratna described the Obama administration’s proposed Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) methodology as “basically the tool that the elite left use as its basis for justifying this ridiculous regulatory policy in terms of energy.”23Videos – Kevin Dayaratna, AFEC (Panel 3b: Peace Dividend: Benefits Of Ending The War On Fossil Fuels),” The Heartland Institute, December 3, 2017. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/KQbVY. Archived .mp4 on file at DeSmog.

Dayaratna also claimed that the SCC methodology could, “under very reasonable assumptions,” yield negative outcomes – meaning a net-positive social outcome from carbon usage. The policy implications of this, according to Dayaratna, were that:

You shouldn’t be taxing carbon dioxide emissions, you should be subsidizing it instead.”24Videos – Kevin Dayaratna, AFEC (Panel 3b: Peace Dividend: Benefits Of Ending The War On Fossil Fuels),” The Heartland Institute, December 3, 2017. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/KQbVY. Archived .mp4 on file at DeSmog.

March 27, 2017

In a commentary for The Daily Signal titled “Unlocking Our Immense Oil and Gas Supply Can Make America Great Again,” Kevin Dayaratna praised the expansion of U.S. oil and gas extraction, and called for opening up more federal lands for drilling and hydraulic fracturing:

In addition to reducing average production costs, the shale revolution is a classic example of the free market at its best…[T]he most advantageous effect of the shale revolution is the stimulus to American energy consumption.”25Kevin Dayaratna, Richard Sigman. “Unlocking Our Immense Oil and Gas Supply Can Make America Great Again,” The Daily Signal, March 27, 2019. Archived March 30, 2017. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/fPjcq

January 18, 2017

In a commentary for The Daily Signal co-authored with Nicolas Loris, Dayaratna hailed the confirmation of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Scott Pruitt and called for the agency to “rein in regulations that have little scientific backing and environmental benefit.”26Kevin Dayaratna, Nicolas Loris. “EPA’s Top Priority Should Be to Eliminate Bogus Global Warming Models,” The Daily Signal, January 18, 2017. Archived July 11, 2017. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/b5R1D

Criticizing the Obama administration’s attempts to integrate the long-term social costs of carbon emissions into energy policy, Dayaratna and Loris suggested that these efforts were detrimental to economic development:27Kevin Dayaratna, Nicolas Loris. “EPA’s Top Priority Should Be to Eliminate Bogus Global Warming Models,” The Daily Signal, January 18, 2017. Archived July 11, 2017. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/b5R1D

Importantly, these regulations would have little to no climate benefit. Our research has also consistently found that reducing the emissions of these greenhouse gases would have a negligible effect on global temperatures and sea level rise. The Trump administration should ban the use of these integrated assessment models and the social cost of greenhouse gases for EPA regulations and policymaking. Enabling markets and entrepreneurs to meet America’s energy demands, not the whims of bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., will be one of the first steps toward making American energy even better.”

Key Deeds

February 7, 2019

Kevin Dayaratna appeared as a minority witness before the House Subcommittee on Water, Oceans, and Wildlife, at a hearing titled “Healthy Oceans and Healthy Economies: The State of Our Oceans In the 21st Century.” In his testimony, Dayaratna suggested that carbon dioxide emissions were beneficial to the environment:28Subcommittee Hearing: Healthy Oceans and Healthy Economies: The State of Our Oceans In the 21st Century,” naturalresources.house.gov, February 7, 2019. Archived February 20, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/KyhSJ

“A more fundamental question not discussed by the federal government is, are there actually any benefits associated with carbon dioxide emissions? Well, a model often employed by the EPA actually quantifies these benefits. In fact, under some very reasonable assumptions, there are substantial probabilities of negative social cost of carbon, or in layman’s terms, actual benefits. In some cases, as high as two thirds resulting from greater CO2 prevalence, allowing increased agriculture and forestry yields. This negative social cost of carbon estimate would signify that carbon dioxide emissions are not a cost but a benefit to society.”

March 23, 2017

Kevin Dayaratna spoke at the Heartland Institute’s 12th International Conference on Climate Change, delivering a talk titled “The Smoke and Mirrors Behind Integrated Assessment Modeling.” Dayaratna called into question the modeling and analyses used by climate change scientists to forecast global temperatures:29Kevin D. Dayaratna, ICCC-12 (Panel 2B Cost Benefit Analysis and The Social Cost of Carbon),” YouTube video posted by user The Heartland Institute, April 5, 2017. Archived .mp4 on file at DeSmog.

Global warming alarmists will always tell you the science is settled on global warming…[W]hen you really think about it, the phrase ‘settled science,’ that’s an oxymoron. Science is something that’s by definition unsettled.”

Dayaratna went on to offer a prediction based on The Heritage Foundation’s proprietary forecasting tool, the “Heritage Energy Model:”30Kevin D. Dayaratna, ICCC-12 (Panel 2B Cost Benefit Analysis and The Social Cost of Carbon),” YouTube video posted by user The Heartland Institute, April 5, 2017. Archived .mp4 on file at DeSmog.

By 2035 there would be an average employment shortfall of over 400,000 lost jobs, a total loss of income of more than $20,000 for a family of four, a 13-20% increase in household electricity prices, and an aggregate $2.5 trillion loss in GDP. All this for a negligible change in global temperatures…[M]oreover, taking these models seriously…would result, literally, in economic disaster.”

July 22, 2015

Kevin Dayaratna appeared before the House Committee on Natural Resources, on a panel with Patrick Michaels of the Cato Institute, to provide a critical analysis of the Obama administration’s proposed Social Cost of Carbon methodology.31Oversight Hearing on ‘An Analysis of the Obama Administration’s Social Cost of Carbon’,naturalresources.house.gov, July 22, 2015. Archived August 26, 2015. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/BScBg

June 24, 2015

In testimony before the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Kevin Dayaratna criticized the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan, suggesting it would harm the U.S. economy while having a negligible impact on the environment:32Kevin Dayaratna. “The Economic Impact of the Clean Power Plan,” The Heritage Foundation. Archived March 11, 2018. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/G4Zh5

The Clean Power Plan institutes a series of burdensome regulations that provide little environmental benefits but significantly damage the American economy. Allowing free markets to determine prices and choices in the energy sector of the American economy, not the dictates of bureaucrats in Washington, will provide us with more affordable energy and a clean, healthy environment.”

June 23, 2015

Kevin Dayaratna appeared at a Heritage Foundation event with Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), broadcast on C-SPAN, titled “Social Cost of Carbon: A Controversial Tool for Misguided Policy.”33Climate Change and Energy Policy,” C-Span.org, June 23, 2015. Archived May 5, 2017. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/K5n38. Archived .mp4 on file at DeSmog.

Dayaratna rebutted the Obama administration’s SCC methodology by citing his own Heritage Foundation research:34Climate Change and Energy Policy,” C-Span.org, June 23, 2015. Archived May 5, 2017. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/K5n38. Archived .mp4 on file at DeSmog.

Global warming alarmists will consistently tell you, oooh, the science is settled on global warming. But the thing is, if it’s science, then how can it be settled?”

November 13, 2014

The Heritage Foundation released a report co-authored by Kevin Dayaratna, Nicolas Loris, and David Kreutzer titled, “The Obama Administration’s Climate Agenda: Underestimated Costs and Exaggerated Benefits.” The report claimed:35Kevin Dayaratna, Nicolas Loris and David Kreutzer. “The Obama Administration’s Climate Agenda: Underestimated Costs and Exaggerated Benefits,” The Heritage Foundation, November 13, 2014. Archived February 15, 2018. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/OEzYc

The Administration posits a number of benefits from its proposed regulations that are derived from measurements of harm avoided. However, these benefits are based on faulty assumptions and/or misrepresentations of the actual state of climate science that result in overstatements of both the risks from climate change and the mitigating impact of the proposed regulations.

[…]

“We are at serious risk of inflicting severe economic damage on ourselves and future generations on a quest that is quixotic at best. Science is a sober and rational endeavor. The current push for radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions is neither.”

December 5, 2013

The Heritage Foundation published a commentary co-authored by David Kreutzer, Nicolas Loris, and Kevin Dayaratna titled “EPA Power Plant Regulations: A Backdoor Energy Tax.” They criticized the EPA’s proposals for reducing carbon emissions from coal-burning power plants, disputed that carbon emissions from human activities are the leading cause of climate change, and claimed there was no scientific evidence of an approaching climate catastrophe:36David Kreutzer, Nicolas Loris and Kevin Dayaratna. “EPA Power Plant Regulations: A Backdoor Energy Tax,” The Heritage Foundation, December 5, 2013. Archived February 20, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/S8trY

While carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions may have contributed in some capacity to climate variations, the available climate data simply do not indicate that the earth is heading toward catastrophic warming with dire consequences for human health and public welfare, nor do the data indicate that the dominant driving force behind climate change is human-induced GHG emissions.”

Affiliations

  • The Heritage Foundation — Chief statistician, data scientist and a senior research fellow at the Center for Data Analysis (2014-present); research programmer and policy analyst (2013-2014);  graduate fellow, Center for Health Policy Studies (2012); research associate (2012)37Kevin Dayaratna,” The Heritage Foundation. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/TgMqO 38Kevin Dayaratna,” The Heritage Foundation. Archived March 31, 2023. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/ttcKJ
  • Heartland Institute — Policy advisor39Kevin Dayaratna,” The Heartland Institute. Archived March 31, 2023. Archive URL: https://archive.ph/wip/DCF6J
  • George Washington University, Columbian College of Arts and Sciences — Professorial lecturer in the Department of Mathematics (2015-present) 40“Kevin Dayaratna,” George Washington University Columbian College of Arts and Sciences. Archived February 15, 2019. Archive.is URL: http://archive.is/DlTE9

Social Media

Publications

Other Resources

Resources

Related Profiles

APCO Worldwide Background APCO has been described as “one of the world's most powerful PR firms.”“Public Relations Firms Database: APCO Worldwide,” O'Dwyers. Archive.is URL: https://arc...
Hugh W. Ellsaesser Credentials Ph.D., Meteorology.“Re: Global warming: It's happening,” Letter to NaturalSCIENCE, January 29, 1998. Archived July 28, 2011. Archive.fo URL: https://arch...
Alfred (Al) Pekarek Credentials Ph.D., University of Wyoming (1974). [1]B.A. University of Minnesota-Twin (1965). [1] Background Alfred (Al) Pekarek is a former ass...
Benny Josef Peiser Credentials Ph.D. , University of Frankfurt (1993). Peiser studied political science, English, and sports science. [1], [2] Background Benny Peiser is a sports ...