Is this the new "scientific methond?"?

No, sorry. They're still using the same method which has led to the results that you wish you could deny, but you actually can't.

The scientific method:

1. Define the question

2. Gather Information and Resources

3. Form Hypothesis

4. Perform Experiment and Collect Data

5. Analyze Data

6. Interpret Data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis

7. Publish results

8. Retest(frequently done by other scientists)

So I take it that your hypothesis is "Climate Change is not really happening"

So I assume you've already defined the question and gathered resources. Now if we could just see the experiment that you've done, and the data analysis, as well as your conclusions and the fact that you've published your study for other scientists to review and retest. Please post that info if you can. Because that's what the scientists have done in their research of climate change. They have put their reputations on the line for everyone to see and check for themselves. And don't you think that if they could prove it wrong they would have? No one wants the climate to change and screw us all.

It is a sad state of affairs because now that all this has happened if something environmentally destructive DOES get proven to be a fact by the real scientific method, people like yourself will not believe it.

The Boy That Cried Global Warming may have doomed us to the politicization of the environment and its inevitable destruction thereof.

The liberal scientific method: ignore any evidence that does not support a pre-determined conclusion, while cherry picking data that does. The credibility of the evidence doesn't really matter in this case, as long as it supports the desired conclusion. The ingenious thing about this method is that it's completely opposite of the traditional one.

The other steps in the new scientific method are to falsify data and apply for a fat government grant.

yet the glaciers are smaller

and the temperate on the south pole has risen 5c , you politicize a Scientific phenomena because an opposing politicians supports it

i92 science academies around the world agree , yet you with your high school science apparently know better

Al Gore is no different than Tilton or Robertson.

It is a religion.

That's pretty much it. Oh yeah, and don't forget to proclaim that the debate is over when none was ever actually allowed to take place.