You could be generally right about physics and chemistry (though my expertise to comment thereon stops at A-level). It's fields of more immediate practical/political/commercial/emotional importance that seem to be more associated with pseudo-scientific consensuses. Especially a lot of medicine. Lysenkoism is another case in point (and could overhyped permaculture become a new Lysenkoism?).
Denial of Climate Catastrophe falls well into the concept of clashing with strong status-quo interests. Another factor in false consensus is self-servingness of professional researchers. One way this manifests is refusal to acknowledge the solution of a problem (e.g. that most autism is now easily curable, or my explanation of what it is), as that puts all the researchers out of their jobs. Another way it manifests is as a new pseudo-paradigm in bogus justification of a huge new rich seam of employment for researchers. Two instances are the aforementioned AIDS/HIV hoax, and the beta-amyloid-based search for a cure for Alzheimers (AD). This flies in the face of the fact that the amyloid plaques are far less correlated with dementia than are the tau tangles, just if you bogusly define AD in terms of amyloid, then like wow all your research will correlate with it. This enormous pseudo-research enterprise also flies in the face of another of my studiously-ignored explanations, of why dementia cannot be cured (except by bolting on extra memory modules) www.zazz.fsnet.co.uk/ad.htm

In addition to the instances mentioned in my reply just above, the case of twice-Nobel-Prizewinner Linus Pauling deserves a mention. On the web you can find his review of evidence of vitamin C preventing or curing the common cold. Even though it is the work of the Nobel author of much of the modern chemistry textbook, it can easily be understood by anyone of teenager-level science. Its conclusion is far from fence-sitting. And yet you can rest assured that the professional "scientific consensus" is that this great genius somehow became a crackpot nutter in respect of this and ditto his great book about vit C curing cancer. Billion-dollar industries do not like uncorruptable geniuses pointing out how to bypass their profits with cheapo natural products. The "scientific consensus" is almost always the funded "scientific consensus".