Observations of what? Man has been observing things since years beyond counting. Please be more specific.
name the scientist that successfully explained the observations about the moving pollen
To accurately determine which of Janice's observations is explained by Hypothesis I but not by Hypothesis II, we would need specific details about the hypotheses and the observations. Without that context, it's impossible to pinpoint the unique explanatory power of Hypothesis I over Hypothesis II. Please provide more information about the hypotheses and observations for a precise answer.
they are classifying
After making thier observations, scientists study their data looking for what?
observations
There have been several scientists who have successfully explained observations in their respective fields, such as Charles Darwin in biology with his theory of evolution by natural selection, Albert Einstein in physics with his theory of relativity, and Marie Curie in chemistry with her research on radioactivity.
name the scientist that successfully explained the observations about the moving pollen
Scientists such as Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein successfully explained the observations of the physical world through their groundbreaking theories of physics. Newton's laws of motion and universal gravitation, as well as Einstein's theory of relativity, helped to provide comprehensive explanations for a wide range of phenomena in the universe.
is studying, collecting data and recording relevant information. These observations are based on the scientist's senses and are typically objective and unbiased. The scientist may use various tools and techniques to aid in making accurate observations.
He urged people to use their sences to make observations, just as scientist today make observations
By making mistakes.(:
A scientist may create an hypothesis on the basis of their observations. If their observations are carelessly made or recorded then any hypotheses they offer will be inaccurate reflections of nature. A scientist may alternatively collect observations to test an hypothesis. If these observations are carelessly made or recorded then the conclusions that the scientist makes about the hypothesis could very well be incorrect. At the very least the conclusions they draw would not be based on sound evidence (because the observations are unsound).
Before the scientific revolution scientists would do mostly observations. These observations are what lead to the rise of patterns and the need for the scientific revolution.
Jules Verne
To accurately determine which of Janice's observations is explained by Hypothesis I but not by Hypothesis II, we would need specific details about the hypotheses and the observations. Without that context, it's impossible to pinpoint the unique explanatory power of Hypothesis I over Hypothesis II. Please provide more information about the hypotheses and observations for a precise answer.
their tools and observations.
Cell Theory