Q&A

Is there anything wrong with the scientific method?

Is there anything wrong with the scientific method?

Documentation of experiments is always flawed because everything cannot be recorded. One of the most significant problems with the scientific method is the lack of importance placed on observations that lie outside of the main hypothesis (related to lateral thinking).

Are scientific laws always true?

Scientific laws are short, sweet, and always true. They’re often expressed in a single statement and generally rely on a concise mathematical equation. They must never be wrong (that is why there are many theories and few laws).

What do all scientists have in common?

There are several characteristics that are common among people who decide to pursue a career as a scientist, characteristics that lend themselves to carrying out the kind of work scientists do. These include strong observational skills, curiosity, logic, creativity, skepticism, and objectivity.

READ ALSO:   Is it OK to practice kissing with a friend?

Was Einstein a true scientist?

Albert Einstein was a physicist who developed the general theory of relativity. He is considered one of the most influential scientists of the 20th century.

Can a scientist be ever wrong?

Scientists are wrong so often because the questions they ask are difficult ones-scientists seek truth, and truth is rare and elusive. Because the root cause of so many false scientific discoveries is widespread statistical confusion, a solution is feasible: statistical education.

What if science is wrong?

Science is wrong for three reasons. (1) There are at least 1000 peer reviewed science articles that say science is wrong. This includes Newton, quantum mechanics, and relativity theory. (2) Math uses real numbers. Real numbers are not objects of nature, therefore real numbers are false.

When science is wrong?

The phrase science was wrong before (or variations thereof, such as science has been wrong in the past, science is only human, or science is not infallible) is a technique used in order to reject scientific consensus, especially on evolution and global warming.