A quick back of the envelope calculation shows that airborne microplastics can't possibly be significantly contributing to global warming. That's not surprising; there are millions of other things that aren't contributing to global warming.

Despite this, someone decides to do a study, and finds that, to no one's surprise, airborne micro plastic is not in fact making a significant contribution to global warming. So that should surely settle it, right?

Nope. Instead, they declare that it's far from conclusive, leaving the door open for another round of the same grift, taking away funding that could be going to things that actually _are_ contributing to the problem.

And somehow _pointing_this_out_ is "overly cynical bs"?