Scientific consensus is like the college football playoff voting system. There are many pieces of information and theories (teams) and they all have their merits and problems.
The general consensus is that climate change is happening and people are causing it. That’s based on the entirety of the top 25 being teams (theories and information) based on voting all confirming climate change is a real occurrence.
The controversy comes in where there are 3 voters (scientists) that have put Rutgers as their number 1 team to win the whole of the college football playoffs. The scientists all agree that Rutgers is a good team. They just think that Rutgers is an unlikely choice to win this year.
Additionally, it is known that of the 3 that are selecting Rutgers, 2 have financial ties to people who would benefit from that school going to the college football playoffs.
If you are denying climate change, you are doing the equivalent of selecting Rutgers as the best team in college football for 2016. This raises the question on how you are doing that. Objectively, you are either being paid to have an opinion that is contradictory to reason or you don’t understand how football (science) is played.
Stop scoring football games like they are a golf match.