What Happy said is blatantly not true. Many 'real' scientists do believe in anthropogenic climate change and that it will have a catastrophic impact.
I don't see how you can claim that societies such as the Royal Society, which have released statements strongly in support of the findings of the IPCC, do not consist of real scientists. Real scientists do believe in catastrophic anthropogenic global warming.
Also I do kind of agree that consensus is a touchy word when used in cases where there is still significant debate and perhaps I shouldn't have used it, how about 'the majority scientific opinion is that anthropogenic climate change is occurring'?
If the peer review process has been twisted by the IPCC it is a bad thing, can you please provide a source other than Prof. Reiter for it though? As well as the top scientists thing?
Also yes I am arguing a point that is not directly related to the OP. I don't see whats wrong with that? Also I don't know a huge amount about the mechanics of climate change which is why I would find it difficult to debate it, I do know that plenty of scientists do have the same opinion as voiced by the IPCC. I only argue about things that I actually know enough about =P.
