Those pushing the anthropomorphic climate change agenda never, AFAIK, ever admit that this view is ONLY consensus (based on data and models) but not independently verifiable via the Scientific Method, the gold standard for science.
You're talking in circles. What do you suppose the scientific method is, genius?
As it happens, I, unlike you, know that the scientific method is based on experimentation and trial and error applied to SMALL CLOSED SYSTEMS in a REPEATABLE FASHION. Exactly what you CANNOT do with the atmosphere.
But really, talking to a lawyer, theocrat, statist, quack doctor and now enviro, while the titanic is sinking is kinda...pointless.
Especially when you're emotionally invested. Obviously you're emotional about it. So just deal with that, rather than pretend. But onto your point and logical claim. No, the scientific method is NOT about "small, closed systems" in a "repeatable fashion". REPEAT: NOT about that. So anything else you wish to surprise us with, poo-holer? \0x