Want this question answered?
A scientific theory is supported by evidence. Without evidence, it is only a hypothesis.
The theory is based on replicable evidence. This evidence turns a theory into a fact.
The red shift doesn't just indicate that there is evidence for the Big Bang theory: the Hubble red shift is evidence supporting the Big Bang theory.
NO. take Darwin's theory of evolution for example. there is no real evidence, but it is accepted as fact by most in America today.
The evidence of cosmic microwave background radiation supports the Big Bang theory.
The fission theory is a scientific explanation for the formation of the Moon. It suggests that the Moon was once part of the Earth and broke off due to a massive impact with another celestial body, leading to its formation. This theory is supported by evidence such as the similarities in composition between the Earth and Moon.
The fission theory, the capture theory, the condensation theory, the colliding planetesimals theory and the ejected ring theory.
The fission theory, the capture theory, the condensation theory, the colliding planetesimals theory and the ejected ring theory.
"Evidence". There's no special term to distinguish evidence supporting one theory in science from evidence supporting any other theory in science.
It's the fission theory, if anyone wants the wrong answer.
A scientific theory is supported by evidence. Without evidence, it is only a hypothesis.
cell theory
Cell Theory
A common theory is a theory which has not been proven or a theory without evidence.
The theory is based on replicable evidence. This evidence turns a theory into a fact.
the evidence that the phlogistan theory was correct was that there was heat and by the way this is definetly correct
The red shift doesn't just indicate that there is evidence for the Big Bang theory: the Hubble red shift is evidence supporting the Big Bang theory.