> The goal of the proposed team would be to collect evidence and examine alternative hypotheses.

But they exist. They are all the scientists already working in the field. Which is why the next statement is suspect:

> No one is proposing creating a team for its own sake.

I am assuming this Red Team business is about funding. They want to pay people "outside science" to challenge scientists who are already doing their jobs and are quite good at it.

That is why this makes no scientific sense. But it makes PERFECT political sense. It's politics.

The idea is that the existing science is already politically biased, so a new team will be created to investigate verboten hypotheses, contributing new evidences to the conversation which might challenge or support the existing consensus. Whether or not you or I agree with the premises is a different matter.