This is incorrect . For a theory to be useful , it generally has to be considered correct within a certain sigma , such as sigma 3 or 5 . If a new theory does not have a higher probability of being true , with a stronger claim , then the new evidence does not hold up to scrutiny . It has nothing to do with consensus . Like I said , I ' m not even arguing against climate change . If someone can ' t present strong evidence against climate change , then it can ' t be discounted . But science is not made by consensus . We do not agree upon new discoveries . New discoveries are selfevident by their evidence . Consensus is about as good as several people looking at a car on a street and agreeing together that they see a car . Wouldn ' t matter if they didn ' t look at the car , it would still be there .