Actually facts are kind of important. They really do help and hinder cases. Attorneys usually like to prevail for their clients So yeah, attorneys care a lot about facts. But what I'm guessing you're reacting to is who gets to decide what are the facts.
BigWheelPowerBrakeSlider
If you want to know if an issue has real potential consequences, in this instance climate change, see what insurance companies are doing about it. Live in a state where wildfires or hurricanes are an issue? As droughts increase and ocean temperatures increase, your homeowners insurance is going up significantly faster than ever before. Insurance companies exist to make money and they spend huge sums in actuarial predictions to keep making that money.
If a person has a pending charge and pick up a new one unrelated to the first, unless there is some procedural or legal conflict, the two cases can be (and often are) combined for judicial expediency as it will be the same judge and prosecutor (and public defender if that applies) on both cases. Also, sometimes one jury can hear both charges, and sometimes they need to be tried separately, and that can depend on a variety of factors.
Meanwhile in the US the NSA just hoovering up every bit of data ever.