That would be a testable hypothesis that you have not tested. Anybody can do whataboutism but it isn't a meaningful argument. If it's your belief that the literature is biased by 'green' funding, prove it.

how would this be done, without being dismissed as being "just a bunch of plots with no effort to engage with the existing literature and study"?

Engaging with the existing literature would be a good start.

If you were interested in studying the relationship between bias and funding you might do a survey of published papers and articles on the subject.

If you can identify some measurable criteria that can be used to rate how "green" a paper's funding is then you can use that as an axis and compare the surveyed papers to reveal trends.

Additionally, since one is already doing that, check out what kind of funding Fossil Fuel companies have done in the past and present.

>and if necessary, turn off Fox News

Quips like this aren't very productive if you want to convince others of your viewpoint.