My point is that I'm not concerned whether anyone laughed.
As to whether or not the Scientific Method is outdated, I would say that, "No, it's not." If anything, the Scientific Method has yet to become widely accepted enough to make an impact in the furthest reaches of the world, darkened by ignorance and superstitious belief. Probably one of the best things that the Scientific Method can teach a person is that sometimes, what we think is so, really isn't. It's really very simple: you have something you think might be true, and you try to perform a test to see if it is. If it isn't, you try a new hypothesis. If your test seems to confirm that it is true, you repeat this test to see if your test wasn't biased and that it continues to validate your hypothesis. And you have other people do the same thing. How is this in the least bit static or outdated? How can such a simple thing of "test what you think is true" ever be outdated? In many practical research situations, you can find the Scientific Method misappropriated, but that isn't the Method itself. That's bureaucracy and selfish personal interest (or possibly even self-delusion) getting in the way of the process.
Also, what the hell do you mean by "instantaneous data"? Fluidity? Why are you being so vague and ambiguous? Could it be that, in actuality, you have nothing concrete and gainful to say? I almost think you're a troll.