The author admits - hurrah! - that consensus is irrelevant in science, but proceeds to invoke it anyway. The only proper emotional reaction on the part of the reader is pity. "It may be crap, but it's the best we have" is not an argument for veracity.
The "If you don't give me an alternative [that I, as a final arbiter, can decide not to accept as valid]" straw man argument has been often used by Obama and is now widely adopted by liberal/progressive/socialist/Democratic disciples as a way to brand the opponents as "deniers" and thus avoid the real arguments against their position. If you have more than one alternative explanation, then you are also inconsistent and incohesive (because there can be only one explanation — their theory) and thereby all the other arguments are "deemed" invalid.
Or, as former CEO of Netscape Jim Barksdale said, ""If we have data, let's look at data. If all we have are opinions, let's go with mine."
OK!! Everybody pay attention!
Lesson for today:
1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth.
2. The sun is a ball of fire that controls the climates of all its planets.
3. The earth is one of the sun’s planets.
4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun.
5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks.
Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?