Eh, seems reasonable to me.
By releasing data which is sympathetic to the need to do more research in your particular area of expertise, you are guaranteeing that you will get additional research grants and more $$. Plus fame.
If I came out tomorrow with some reasonable scientific data showing that we are all in imminent danger, I bet I would get more money to keep researching it.
And what you just said highlights the reason why independent peer-reviewed publications are important. Statistics can easily be skewed towards one outcome or the other to prove a specific argument.
I personally don't believe global warming is as bad as it's made out to be but I also find it hard to believe that there would be such a large amount of collusion between the different scientists.
That said, money is a powerful motivator for quite a few people...