Want this question answered?
Scientisits and other students in progess of learning about scientific method
No. Placing bounds on research prevents anything further in that field from being developed as well as it could be. It might also restrict what could be discovered; obviously banning one thing taht leads to another nonbanned area would mean that either one needs to be unbanned, or the other needs to be banned.
Decisions based on non-scientific thought are like the bets you might make on the outcome of a horse race or the toss of a coin based on how lucky you were feeling at the time, rather than a careful examination of verifiable facts. Another example might be the decision of a politician to vote on a law that might be popular and get him or her more votes at the next election instead of considering whether the law would be actually enforcable. One State Government in America is said to have voted for a repeal of Newton's Laws of Gravity!
When observing data and facts that do not have, or conflict with scientific theory, one looks at, and assumes all of the possible reasons for this data, tests it again and again, once one is happy that they have found the most reasonable explanation, it becomes an hypothesis. After this the work is published into the scientific community, where it is scrutinized by other scientists in your field of research, in which they attempt to disprove your hypothesis. If none can disprove it then it eventually becomes accepted in the scientific community. This is when it becomes scientific theory.
is it because they protected it
By taking away research funds if certain standards ar not met
By taking away research funds if certain standards ar not met
By taking away research funds if certain standards ar not met
For example, you might mean: Should government-funded researchers be held accountable? or Should medical trial research be conducted ...
Plato.
Because they might kill you
Performing a PESTLE is the way you might go about this.
This question is too broad to be answered. Can you elaborate a little? For example, you might mean: Should government-funded researchers be held accountable? or Should medical trial research be conducted and evaluated by completely disinterested parties? or you might mean: Should scientific research be conducted under the direction of a religious authority?
(a) The scientists involved might not have tried to make a business case for their research to secure funding from business, inspite of its potential commercial or industrial value. (b) Although the outcomes of the research might have value to business it might be too expensive or risky to be of interest to business. (c) There might be political reasons for supporting the research. (d) There might be no business value for the results of the research, or that business value might be unclear. (e) Similar to (c), there is student demand for studies in many university faculties, and public interest in their results, in spite of the absence of any commercial or practical value for them.
Someone might find information on Prostista (a small, single celled, microscopic organism) from a website that does scientific research on this organism.
Yes, the topic you choose will influence where you look for information. For example, scientific topics might lead you to articles in academic journals or research databases, while current events might prompt you to check news sources or government websites for up-to-date information.
False. It was an early attempt at forming a union of the colonies"under one government as far as might be necessary for defense and other general important purposes