Cosmic background radiation.
It helped prove the big bang theory.
The astronomical telescope.
This is a misnomer. Scientists often and do prove their findings, particularly through repetition of an experiment. Scientists cannot prove a negative (reindeer can't fly), but can only prove such under specific conditions (these reindeer can't fly in March). Theories are not said to be proven until they can fully explain a set of conditions. Even then, parts of a theory can be proven, but the whole remains open to refinement.
Real scientists do not "gather evidence in support of" any theory. The technical term for that kind of thing is "cherry-picking". Real scientists build a theory to explain the evidence that they have already gathered, and then test the theory to see whether it holds water. The easiest, fastest way to make sure that you are regarded as a wingnut by real scientists is to adopt or invent a theory, and then spend your time trying to prove it.
Theory: an explanation of an event that has been supported by consistent, repeated experimental results and has therefore been accepted by most scientists. Model: A verbal, mathematical, or visual representation of a scientific structure or process, which allows scientists to construct and test inferences and theories.
Seafloor spreading helped prove the theory of continental drift. Pangea theory also helped.
probably when you can prove it
Well, at the time it was proved, it was a theory. Then, Arno Penzias, a nobel laureate, and a physicist, found cosmic background radiation, which helped to prove what happened when there was a gigantic explosion.
Alfred Weneger was trying to prove his theory of Continental Drift. Many other scientists before him had the same theory, but they never could prove it. He had five pieces of evidence.
There was no evidence to prove it
many differnet scientists doing expiraments that prove the hypothesis to be true-then it becomes a theory
It helped prove the big bang theory.
It is another example that helps scientists with their theory that all of Earth's landmasses (land) were/was once connected. WOOOOOOOOOT WOOOOOOOOOOT
Scientists do not prove things. Lamarck's theory is long refuted as acquired characteristics and the use and disuse concepts are not explanations for evolution of populations.
Hypotheses are useful because they can be tested, and scientists love to test to prove if whether your theory is right or wrong.
The astronomical telescope.
Hypotheses are useful because they can be tested, and scientists love to test to prove if whether your theory is right or wrong.