How much money goes toward <promoting> climate change? That would actually be a far more intersting paper. Count all of the receipts and distribution of cash-flows down to the nickel on expensed taxis and expensive hotel-rooms, promotions, papers, professorships and other "self-interested" uses of what is almost always tax-payer money. There is nothing wrong at having a two-sided debate, I think the FISA courts are excellent examples on that front. People asking questions and taking opposing views is not, in the general sense any form of "conspiracy". Especially when what they are arguing over is just a proxy-war over other political topics that polite company doesn't always discuss in public--because it basically comes down to peoples sources of salary and their pay grade.
How much money goes toward <promoting> climate change? That would actually be a far more intersting paper. Count all of the receipts and distribution of cash-flows down to the nickel on expensed taxis and expensive hotel-rooms, promotions, papers, professorships and other "self-interested" uses of what is almost always tax-payer money. There is nothing wrong at having a two-sided debate, I think the FISA courts are excellent examples on that front. People asking questions and taking opposing views is not, in the general sense any form of "conspiracy". Especially when what they are arguing over is just a proxy-war over other political topics that polite company doesn't always discuss in public--because it basically comes down to peoples sources of salary and their pay grade.