I understand the science, which is why I scorn it. And no, there isn't a consensus. Those who disagree are suppressed, if not simply ejected. And the most prominent "scientist" in the UK has been caught talking about how they need to manipulate data before people find out that their predictions were so wrong. Where is the science in that?
Just because there is a consensus doesn't mean it's right, either. There was a scientific consensus for 2,300 YEARS that women could only get pregnant if they have an orgasm. They had all kinds of evidence. They were WRONG.
There was a consensus for nearly as long that bad air or fumes was the major cause of sickness. Germ theory was a REVOLUTION, and it faced enormous contempt and opposition because the CONSENSUS was that it was bunk. Tiny animals? You have to be joking.
You clearly haven't had many close ties with academia, to buy into the idea that scientists are above mere mortals in their lack of bias and self-interest.
Man-made global warming is POSSIBLE, but no great amount from CO2. We're near the saturation point above which CO2 CAN'T do anything more. There are WAY scarier things that we really, really, REALLY do need to keep an eye on these things. But they're going to lose everyone's trust over this CO2 nonsense, and no one will listen when the physics actually is there to back them up.