Whether they confirm or deny climate science, they're likely getting paid well to do so. There's obviously a lot of corruption on both sides of the argument. If it's your conviction that we're basically *$%#ed, play devil's advocate and see what you come up with. Just an idea.. I used to believe it. Now I think there's just as much reason to doubt the scientists aren't prone to fudge data for further government grants. In a world of government cuts, it helps if you're studying something which is politically motivated/financially backed.