The fact that almost all of them are still worried about it should concern you. They are not pulling a fast one on you.
Whoa, there, sparky. Almost all of whom? Nearly every geologist (we study climate, we study the lithic deposits made as a result of the climate, especially) I know--and there are quite a few--will tell you (if they don't rely on grants and are not tied directly into the university system (I.E. on the payroll)) that the science is far from settled, and that it is highly (as in 99.99% sure likely) that humans are not the forcing agent, nor is human activity or emissions the forcing agent in any global warming which may be occurring. In fact, for over the last decade, there has been no warming according to satellite data.
Taking a longer view, one which encompasses hundreds of millions of years, puts the current small fraction of the entire climate history of the planet in perspective--a perspective the average person is denied by presentations that only go back to the last temperature lows and which predict increases in temperature which simply do not occur.
As I said before, what apparent agreement you are seeing is an artifact: of who is handed the microphone, who gets to the podium, who has the grant money (which is awarded on a political basis, because the politicians see not only a cash cow, but the means to more power) who does the 'peer review', the publicity, and who controls what thoughts, what research are published, and even access to unadulterated data.
If you never saw anything to the contrary, you might be convinced that there was no dissent in the scientific ranks, but as scientists well know, few things are ever met with universal agreement.
