I've observed that for the past 4.5+ billion years, the sole principle driver of the climate on our planet has been the million-earth sized nuclear reaction it's in orbit around.
That the past 100 years of cows farting would suddenly have infinitely greater impact strikes me as absurd, and meshes well with the decades of failed predictions I've observed its purveyors making.
That they will casually disregard, as entirely irrelevant, large-scale human deployments specifically targeted at changing the climate - that have succeeded in doing so - only supports this assessment.
Finally, asserting a "consensus" only by ignoring or mocking any and all dissenting views is utterly pathetic and not indicative of science. It's more indicative of field capture by industry, politics and profits.
Even the most cursory analysis of investment flows, or the personal investments of people promoting it and what they stand to personally gain from it (while taking private actions contradicting public claims) confirms this also.
That everything the field claims about the future is based on "modelling" (which is another word for "imagining"), really just cements the level of "science" we're dealing with here. No wonder their "models" always fail.
I'm not saying the climate isn't changing, and I'm not even saying we couldn't be causing it. I'm saying the current investigation into it is off-track, compromised, and historically incapable of coming up with any accuracy.
Ie, if China can successfully, and continually, modify the climate across their entire continent using a large-scale tech deployment, how is it reasonable to exclude it from theories on anthropogenic climate? It makes no sense.
(And if you aren't aware of China's weather modification programs, look them up. It's not "conspiracy theory", even CNN has reported on it.)