[Tervuren]

It is worth noting that if one were to pay attention to IPCC meetings this unified accurate consensus doesn't exist.
But there are votes on stuff and funding does tend to create papers with a particular view point as the headline.
There are lots of interesting things, such as solar activity predictions are voted on after a solar cycle has already started and been observed.
This means that news organizations can headline predictive accuracy even when prior to our existing cycle starting climate models were working off a highly innacurrate next cycle prediction.

Weather plays an important but absent role in climate modeling causing predictive inaccurracy.
We will continue to look stupid via inaccurate predictions.
Backwards clock, can be right more than twice a day.
NY still isn't underwater yet...

People desiring power seem to have a dictating role in what gets published within their power spheres.
Then there are those willing to speak otherwise.
It isn't a unified block of consensus on what, when, how, etc...

In light of the hubris, the best thing to do is what makes economic sense in the meantime.
And do more research.