No, The Science is settled. Climate change is happening.
The politicing and the "other side" of the debate has to do with socio-economic factors, and folks debating about energy infrastructure, its not the climate science that is causing the confusion.
You cant have unlimited free energy, that goes against the physical laws of our universe. If you are referring to "zero point" energy, you are being misled.
Fusion/fission hybrid breeder reactors are the closest we can get to "unlimited energy," in a shorter 5-15 year time frame, contingent on funding that is.
Batteries that charge in 5 minutes are technically super capacitor/battery hybrids, no such thing as a magic battery.
Lithium Ion with a solid electrolyte combined with supercapacitors will probably be.the.next big thing for batteries, at least for practical use outside of a lab.
As for the claim that "both green and anti green are funded by the same folks," that's just called corporations covering their own asses, and its this politicing that makes up this alleged "other side" in discussions of climate.
The science is crystal clear, the politics of energy and infrastructure is what is not clear, and people falsely blame climate science when they should be looking at these other factors.
Exon-Mobil knows climate change is real, BP knows that its real, and they know their oil causes it, we know big Agriculture also contributes, but they all want to keep customers.
Exon and automakers have been investing in the so called "hydrogen economy" since the 70s, knowing full well that even in 2018 hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are prohibitively expensive for mass market, because in part such a technology fundamentally relies on nuclear infrastructure to make it viable.
Ever seen the Toyota Mirai? Textbook example of the pipe dream nature of that technology without a nuclear infrastructure. Or, to be more accurate, its expensive because to make affordable hydrogen the means and materials involved are buried in regulations pertaining to Nuclear materials.
Damn near 40 years of R&D from almost every automaker and energy company in the world for fuel cells, and Toyota still had to resort to buying Mirai owners their fuel for a year+ because it is cost prohibitive.
In fact, The only viable green energy that the fossil industry actually pays for (for research and development) and then also bashes at the same time (by funding its opposition) is Nuclear power, of both fission and fusion variety.
Other than that, fossil fuel companies have also tried to pitch E85 as being "green,"when its very much not, by various avenues of deceptive marketing.
The error in your reasoning I believe is that you see the science of climate as the bone of contention instead of the energy and infrastructure debate which sometimes pays for a fraction of studies that muddy the water.