Your post is riddled with logical fallacy. Saying just because science is sometimes wrong, which by the way is the whole point of it, therefore the 90% plus consensus that the release of carbon is causing an unnatural and unprecedented warming of the earths atmosphere is wrong, is like saying just because it has rained often today it will rain tomorrow. Nonsense basically.

As for not eating meat, regardless how how our brains evolved trying to link it's original evolution, which by the way if you have any evidence please provide, something that occurred hundreds of thousands of years ago to what should reasonable be done today, is also a fallacy. For reasons why we can't afford to eat meat, see Cowspiracy.com

I'd agree with you that the media often misrepresents science and that most people don't have the time or knowledge to view peer to peer reviews scientific journals, they must rely on journalists who can, and that is often flawed due to poor journalism and because of clandestine propaganda campaigns by the big polluters.

For me, I don't know for sure what is happening in the world and I try to apply a few filters and review my sources the best I can, but what, you seriously think that globally, thousands of scientists from institutions like NASA and the U.N, are all wrong? But based on what? The difference seems to be they have evidence to prove what they think is the case, where you do not.