See my comment on the WSJ's enumeration of over 5 billion annually spend on this area; I know it was 1 billion not too many years ago. 100,000 per scientist if there's 50,000 of them; play around with the numbers, but "10s of thousands" feeding at this trough is not unreasonable.

There's a reason why my university's president and department's head are big boosters of AGW/CC, even though the former is a biologist and the latter a chemist.