Scientists who believe the Earth is experiencing global warming cite a range of evidence, including rising global temperatures recorded over the past century, melting polar ice caps and glaciers, and increasing sea levels. They also highlight changes in weather patterns, such as more frequent and intense heatwaves, storms, and droughts. Additionally, the correlation between rising carbon dioxide levels from human activities, such as fossil fuel combustion, and temperature increases supports their claims. These findings are often corroborated by climate models that predict future warming trends based on current emissions scenarios.
Having evidence to support a statement is important because it adds credibility and strengthens the argument being made. Evidence helps to validate the claim and gives others a reason to believe or trust in the information being provided. Without evidence, statements can be seen as purely opinion-based and lacking in credibility.
Fjh
The addition of molecular evidence supported the hypothesis made earlier based on structural evidence. Molecular evidence provides additional data that can confirm or strengthen hypotheses that are based on structural evidence.
Democritus did not have experimental evidence to support his idea of the atom. Instead, his idea was based on philosophical reasoning and speculation.
Harry Hess proposed the theory of seafloor spreading, which provided physical evidence for the movement of the Earth's crust. Alfred Wegener proposed the theory of continental drift, which lacked a mechanism to explain how continents moved. Hess's theory had more scientific support and evidence, leading to greater acceptance by the scientific community.
I do not so much " believe it " as I an convinced by the myriad lines of converging evidences that support the theory of evolution by natural selection. talkorigins.org
Yes, you can dispute a check if you believe there is an error or fraudulent activity by contacting your bank and providing evidence to support your claim.
Most believe that he was born in Haiti, but there is no documentary evidence to support or refute that belief.
Simply put, because there is not enough evidence to support it. "Rejected by scientists" should not be taken to always mean "scientist believe it is impossible" - rather, consistent evidence that support the hypothesis has not been produced.
Corroborate means to strengthen or support with evidence.
If you believe in the concept of a soul then it is invisible, bodiless and shapeless. So far their is no evidence to support the concept of a soul though anyone with any evidence should post it in the discussion
Having evidence to support a statement is important because it adds credibility and strengthens the argument being made. Evidence helps to validate the claim and gives others a reason to believe or trust in the information being provided. Without evidence, statements can be seen as purely opinion-based and lacking in credibility.
There is no scientific evidence. Those who believe in ghosts will put forward non-scientific evidence.
Yes, an incredulous person can come to believe in what is happening if they are presented with enough evidence or convincing argument to support the truth of the situation. Their initial skepticism can be overcome with strong evidence and reasoning.
I think there is, there is photographic evidence and i am currently working on the scientific evidence. (i.e how deep does the lochness have to be and could it support the monster?)=if anyone finds any pure evidence the let me know by answering this question: is the any pure evidence for the lochness monster?=
Most scientists do not believe that Bigfoot exists, as there is no conclusive scientific evidence to support its existence. Claims of Bigfoot sightings and evidence have not been successfully validated through scientific investigation.
Some believe so, and there is some evidence to support the idea. But, he failed miserably by leaving Stalin to take his place.