Similarly, see "Merchants of Doubt" by Oreskes and Conway. A small number of scientists (whose scientific field is sometimes barely or even not-at-all related)

Similarly, see "Merchants of Doubt" by Oreskes and Conway. A small number of scientists (whose scientific field is sometimes barely or even not-at-all related) routinely get hired by front companies for various business interests to deny the hazards of smoking, climate change and so on. Some of the ones who fought the "smoking isn't bad" action went on, after that was finally buried, to work for the "climate change isn't happening" front. Tends to work in the exact same way as this is. Create a reasonable sounding front outfit ("Global Energy Balance Network" in this case), and throw money at the small handful of scientists you can find who will oppose the consensus. Use your money and media contacts to get their views far more publicity than they deserve, creating the illusion of a large body of dissenting scientists. Take advantage of current media belief that "balance" means you have to provide airtime to some crazy kook to oppose any view, and hold off the inevitable for as long as possible.