I suspect that since the vested interests are choosing the political attack route, they probably do know it is credible, they just don't care.
The problem is who are the vested interests? The AGW scientists attack anything skeptical of AGW, and prevent everything being published. What science do you consider credible when it cannot be published in the journals?
Much of the money comes form "Dark sources", like DonorsTrust, and DonorsCapital, meaning they won't tell us, Kind of like legal money laundering. Koch Industries and ExxonMobil money has in large part gone away. It might not be unlikely that they have gone to the untraceable route.
Whic is all very convenient, doing this in secret. How many scientific reports have you see that have no names, because the scientists are too big of pussies to put their name on it?
http://www.scientificamerican....
Regardless, some reseach has shown that from 2003 to 2010:
DonersTrust / DonorsCapital 14%
Sciafe Affiliated Foundations 7%
Lyle and Harry Bradley Foundation 5 %
Koch Affiliated Foundations 5 %
Howard Charitible Foundation 4%
John William Pope Foundation 4%
John William Pope Foundation 4%
Searle Freedom Trust 4%
John Templeton Foundation 4%
Dunn's Foundation for the Advancement of Right Thinking 2%
SMith Richardson Foundation 2%
Vanguard CharitableEndowment Program 2%
THe Kovener Foundation 2%
Annenberg Foundation 2%
Lilly Endowmwnt Inc 2%
Richard and Helen DeVos Foundation 2%
Exxon Mobiil Foundation 1%
Brady Education Foundation 1%
The Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation 1%
Coors Affiliated Foundation 1%
Lakeside Foundation 1%
Herrick Foundation 1%
A number of others at less than 1 percent
The source of this information
http://phys.org/news/2013-12-k...
Unfortunately, there will be less and less information as these defenders of freedom move to untraceable donorship, which is almost always a sure sign of standing by your principles.
What science do you consider credible when it cannot be published in the journals?
Perhaps it might be better explained what I do not consider credible
http://retractionwatch.com/201...
or this:
http://retractionwatch.com/201...
This one was pretty egregious on many levels.
Anyhow, before you put Retrsction watch on your hitlist of liberal organizations, they also hae published retractions of pro AGW papers.
Part of self policing and transparency, rather different than what has become "secret contributors" of the Deniers movement.