One of the difficulties involved in discussion of this topic is the idea of 'science', which for the layperson has strong connotations of 'truth'. In fact, 'science' as it is used here is shorthand for 'the scientific method', which does not make any claim to truth at all. It is simply an agreed upon method of experiment, data analysis, and --critically important-- the open sharing of all this information so that others may critique, replicate, disprove, and improve the investigation. Any conclusion may be later shown to be inaccurate, false, or may be refined or broadened. Unfortunately, the way these investigations are reported gives the impression that scientists are claiming to know the truth, and in fact they are not, at least not the good ones. They may, though, be claiming that the data overwhelming point towards x, y or z.
Another problem is that climate change is a classic example of a 'wicked problem', which as the name implies are basically impossible to solve. From wikipedia:
...
Conklin later generalized the concept of problem wickedness to areas other than planning and policy. The defining characteristics are:[4]
1.The problem is not understood until after the formulation of a solution.
2.Wicked problems have no stopping rule.
3.Solutions to wicked problems are not right or wrong.
4.Every wicked problem is essentially novel and unique.
5.Every solution to a wicked problem is a 'one shot operation.'
6.Wicked problems have no given alternative solutions.
There is little chance of anything as complex as this being sensibly discussed and dealt with by the crowd, or the media.