Yes, because he is the only scientist that discovered the CONTINENTAL DRIFT and studied all about FEATURES,FOSSILS AND EVIDENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE when 1900.
Alfred Wegener's hypothesis of continental drift proposed that all continents were once connected in a single supercontinent called Pangaea. Over time, Pangaea broke apart and the fragments drifted to their current positions. Wegener's idea eventually led to the development of the theory of plate tectonics.
prediction that can be tested is a statement about a future event or outcome that can be confirmed or refuted through observation or experimentation. It should be clear, specific, and measurable so that its accuracy can be assessed objectively. Testing a prediction helps to evaluate the validity of the underlying hypothesis or theory.
The scientist should use the Celsius (°C) unit of measurement to record temperature in her study. This is the most commonly used unit for temperature in scientific research and it is easy to interpret and compare with other data.
Grosseteste, because he taught that a scientist should make observations and then come up with a tentative explanation for why the observed events happened. WRONG grosseteste was known as "the father of the science method" he was not the first modern scientist.
A good hypothesis is testable, meaning it can be proven or disproven through experimentation. It is specific and clearly states the relationship between variables. Finally, it is based on existing knowledge or evidence relevant to the research question.
yes because they didnt know how wegners inteligence was and they should have tried it in the firts place anyway it would have helped relize that his hypothesis waas correct when they dobt of him!
yes because they didnt know how wegners inteligence was and they should have tried it in the firts place anyway it would have helped relize that his hypothesis waas correct when they dobt of him!
no because then they would know least about the world
If I was the scientist you would test is as soon as possible then just skip the hypothesis step
If I was the scientist you would test is as soon as possible then just skip the hypothesis step
If you develop an experiment that truly demonstrates that the hypothesis is wrong*, then the hypothesis will lose its acceptance in the scientific community. * Such an experiment would have to be repeatable by other scientists AND accepted by interested scientists as a proof that the hypothesis is wrong.
The scientist or student scientist should review the results. Conclusions should be drawn based on the results. Then, the hypothesis is reviewed to make sure the results confirm the hypothesis; if not, revise the hypothesis and rerun the experiment.
The experiment that you will design is done to test the hypothesis.
If an experiment does not confirm his hypothesis, the scientist should report this honestly. Even if the results confirmed the hypothesis, further testing should be done by him or others to gather more data.
If a scientist's hypothesis is disproved, they should analyze the data and results to understand why the hypothesis did not hold true. This may involve revisiting their methodology, considering alternative explanations, and conducting additional experiments. The scientist can then refine their hypothesis or develop a new one based on the insights gained. Ultimately, disproving a hypothesis can be a valuable part of the scientific process, leading to greater understanding and new avenues of research.
putting a certain hypothesis is important for the person making a certain experiment.For exampe,if s/he were a scientist,the hypothesis would help in knowing what experiments should be done(in another words,NO hypothesis-->NO experiments will be done).
putting a certain hypothesis is important for the person making a certain experiment.For exampe,if s/he were a scientist,the hypothesis would help in knowing what experiments should be done(in another words,NO hypothesis-->NO experiments will be done).