Something getting downvoted is different from a study presenting solid data not getting published. As far as I know there is no solid data refuting the consensus as described for example in the IPCC reports.
Even if you are 100% convinced climate change is happening (as most of us are), funding people who are trying to disprove it is a necessary and useful function of science.
In fact, if you go into it with a pre-conceived bias that disagrees with everything everybody else has seen, you'll be laughed out of it. You should be laughed out of it too if your bias aligned with what everybody else has seen.