How would you know the truth (apart from your alt-right masters telling you)? Some of the nonsense you've posted suggests that you know next to nothing about the science.
Where is your evidence for this vast conspiracy (again, alt-right blatant propaganda aside)? The vested interest is with the polluters, oil and gas industry. Who are these mysterious conspirators and how did they persuade pretty much all the experts to lie over decades? It's just absurd - this is just blatant science denial, every bit as nutty as anti-vaxxers, creationists, and flat-earthers.
The answer is science is not self sufficient when it comes to the resources needed to do science. Science is beholden to Government, Industry, and Universities, with universities dependent on Government and Industry for resources. Whomever, has the money and resources, has a say on how it will be spent. The CERN collider of Physics was not funded by resources that science generated. Politicians played a big role.
For example, if you were a skilled scientist working for a tobacco company, you can still do good by the book science, even if your company needs you to steer your results toward good Public Relations for your company. You cannot just go free lance while being paid by that company and keep your job. You would need to find a valid science topic or avenue to investigate, that can be published, that also helps your company, if you wish to move up the ladder.
With climate change there is a political effort to shut down the other half of climate science, that does not agree with the needed set of results. This is not how science works, but rather this is how biased resource allocation works. Good science can take any path and still be good science. The problem is not science, but the politics of resource allocation, and this needing to be appeased by scientists, if you wish to move up the ladder; good company men and women. If you go along you will advance, if you fight it, you will be stuck or fired. This is what is happening.
If I was Trump I would request that the funds allocated for climate research be equally divided between the pros and cons. Since science is mercenary and company men will do what they are told to advance their careers, many will migrate to the other side. This will allow for a more balanced approach, so we can better assess the situation. The left wing leadership is resisting fairness and balanced funding, since the resource magic trick will be at risk.
Image if big tobacco could not do its own science, but we could censor even their good science. This would be a political way to squash them, and then lie to the public, using mercenary science as a paid prop. Since industry contributes to science and tobacco contribute to science, it can allocate to itself and balance the political science. It is still in business.