Here's a good scientific article on consensus.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2719747/
No consensus may be a good thing .
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2719747/
Quote:...In science consensus is irrelevant. What are relevant are reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period...
...It is indeed hard to disagree with Mr. Crichton. The historical track record of scientific consensus is nothing but dismal. Many examples can be cited, but there are some classical ones. Nicholas Copernicus and his follower, Galileo Galilei, experienced the effects of consensus when they advanced theories that planet Earth was not the center of the Universe...
No consensus may be a good thing .