While it's true that you can't do science by consensus, it <i>is</i> legitimate to look at a range of studies and see where they agree. Those parts that most studies agree on can justifiably be called the "consensus among the scientific community".<p>Your last paragraph simply isn't justified. Do you think any action or conclusion lives up to that standard? In particular, why do you think those that argue that AGW is <i>not</i> happening should be given more of a benefit of the doubt?<p>AGW is the conclusion of applying simple physics to the problem. In my mind, if you are going to argue that it's <i>not</i> happening, you have much more justification to do.