Scientist usually test and conclude about new discoveries or finds, such as new species, genetic engineering, etc.
Lots of different scientists test the same things to compare different conclusions.
Scientists examine all of the data and try to see what conclusion will fit all of them.
By presenting data that contradict those conclusions
Scientists do that because they are skeptical about other scientists' work. They do not usually believe what other scientists have concluded, so other scientists come up with a hypothesis (or simply state a question) as to contradict, or theorize why another scientists' work and conclusions are wrong. In short: Scientists are skeptical and do not believe what another scientist has come up with as a conclusion.
they based there conclusion on the evidences
Lots of different scientists test the same things to compare different conclusions.
Scientists examine all of the data and try to see what conclusion will fit all of them.
They rely on there conclusions based on observations.
Their conclusions must be repeatedly tested by other scientists and maintain a consistent conclusion.
By presenting data that contradict those conclusions
Both scientists' conclusions could be valid
Scientists do that because they are skeptical about other scientists' work. They do not usually believe what other scientists have concluded, so other scientists come up with a hypothesis (or simply state a question) as to contradict, or theorize why another scientists' work and conclusions are wrong. In short: Scientists are skeptical and do not believe what another scientist has come up with as a conclusion.
they based there conclusion on the evidences
assiting in scientific conclusions
Haha but please... the most efficient method on the market is scientific consensus. That gets you the exact answers you want. We don't actually test anything anymore.
They rely on there conclusions based on Observations.
draw conclusions