0
What might a scientists need to repeat a step in scientific methods?
Wiki User
∙ 6y ago
He would need all the equipment he had when he did the step the first time
Wiki User
∙ 6y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why do scientists repeat other researchers experiment?
Scientists repeat others' experiments to double check their findings as well as to find new information that might have been missed initially.
What might cause scientists to change scientific theory?
Because technology might change in the future.
Why might a scientist need to repeat a step in scientific method?
So he/she could look at the data again if something goes wrong.
How might bad science be caught after it it is published?
A scientific process might not be repeatable. There are always scientists around looking to improve and ridicule the results of other scientists. One of the virtues of science is how well it is invigilated, and one of its greatest embarrassments is how combative and picky and depreciative and just plain nasty scientists are amongst themselves.
How can an idea held by the scientific community be rejected?
Scientists also gather at conferences to present new findings,Researchers who disagree about the data might gather discuss views.
Why might a scientists need to repeat a step in scientific methods?
They want to make sure that their data is repeatable.
Why might a scientists need to repeat a step in scientific method?
So he/she could look at the data again if something goes wrong.
Why might a scientists repeat an experiment?
Scientists repeat their experiments because to make sure that their results are correct.
Why might scientist repeat an experiment?
Scientists repeat their experiments because to make sure that their results are correct.
Why do scientists repeat other researchers experiment?
Scientists repeat others' experiments to double check their findings as well as to find new information that might have been missed initially.
Why might it be important for scientists to be able to communicate their methods and their findings?
Scientists first create an hypothesis. They develop methods to prove their hypothesis. In order for other scientists to replicate the findings and prove or disprove another scientist's outcome, the original scientist MUST describe the methods used and the findings.
What might cause scientists to change scientific theory?
Because technology might change in the future.
Why might a scientist need to repeat a step in scientific method?
So he/she could look at the data again if something goes wrong.
Why does Answers com publish an etymology of the phrase carbon neutral which states that carbon IS a contributor to global warming when according to all research so far this is not proven to be fact?
Because there is no such thing as a 'scientific fact'. Even gravity is not a 'scientific fact'. Scientists do not work with 'facts' but will levels of confidence, of probability. When there is a high level of confidence among the entire scientific community on a particular issue, that is called a 'consensus'. When a scientists has a different opinion (ie, after conducting research and writing a scientific paper), such a differing opinion is generally called a 'hypothesis'. For example: the general scientific consensus is that the earth is round. However, there are still some hypothesis regarding the earth being flat. As long as scientists claiming the earth being flat are not able to convince their fellow scientists through validated research methods which can be repeated by others and peer-reviewed publications in scientific journals, the scientific consensus will not alter. Same is applicable to carbon. The general consensus is that it is a contributor to Global Warming while a minority of scientists have differing hypothesis. Some day their hypothesis might become the general consensus but for that to happen they first have to convince their fellow scientists of the validity of their scientific claims and their research.
How scientists might try to validate the scientific use of carbon-14 in dating?
The results of carbon-14 dating are compared with dendrochronology data.
How might bad science be caught after it it is published?
A scientific process might not be repeatable. There are always scientists around looking to improve and ridicule the results of other scientists. One of the virtues of science is how well it is invigilated, and one of its greatest embarrassments is how combative and picky and depreciative and just plain nasty scientists are amongst themselves.
Methods of inquiry in the two sciences?
In biology, methods of inquiry typically involve experimentation, observation, data collection, and analysis to study living organisms. In psychology, methods of inquiry often include experiments, surveys, case studies, and observational research to understand human behavior and mental processes. Both sciences rely on rigorous scientific methods to gather and interpret data for investigating different aspects of the natural world.
