"Scientific consensus" is a useful term that has been misunderstood and misused by many. It is an important part of the scientific method.
It means that a scientific community is in general agreement through thorough peer review and statistically significant evidence, at a given moment. Particularly, when a hypothesis is deemed a theory, that would be scientific consensus.
By no means does it mean that scientists in the field shouldn't question it or that consensus does not change. That is by definition their job. Just last week, a white dwarf's mass was measured hoping to find irregularities in the predicted age of the universe. Einstein's General Theory of Relativity continues to be annoyingly correct. This is scientific consensus. Go ahead and test your hypothesis that the consensus is wrong, but don't go around saying Einstein was wrong without statistically significant evidence to back it up.
Sure, there are some bad media and perhaps some bad scientists that appeal to the "you're with us or against us" mentality, but that is not what scientific consensus is at all.
So while you have a good understanding of the scientific method, I think you're misusing the term scientific consensus as well in the opposite extreme.
RE: Scientific Consensus: This phrase should make you cringe. At least if you understand science.