Facts and reasons cannot in most circumstances settle scientific controversies. The main issue is a matter of interpretation. One person can interpret data and observations differently from another person. This is where the problem lies. Pride and scientific interpretation can keep a controversy going even when facts and reasons may seem to prove one side false. Also, if there is more than model and those models each have some kind of positive evidence, then they each have a point to argue from. So what in the end will prove one more true over the others? In some cases it is social belief's that will bring an end to a controversy. Other times it will end because other scientists will drop their model and give up on trying to convince that theirs is the correct model. Pasteur's real world question was; how to create sterile air so that spontaneous generation may be tested. His model was to break a flask in high altitude and then reseal it under a flame while holding it with pincers. His nutrient was a yeast infusion. His hypothesis was, this would create sterile air to test spontaneous generation. His data showed that only one out of 20 became prurient. The data seemed to fit the hypothesis closely. Therefore the model seemed to fit the real world. There were no other models at the time to compare and discuss. Pouchet's real world question was; could he perform the same experiment as Pasteur to validate his results. His model was the same as Pasteur's except he uses a file instead of pincers, and hay instead of yeast. His hypothesis was that this would duplicate Pasteur's results. The data showed that eight out of eight of his become prurient. This made his hypothesis incorrect and his model therefore was also wrong. Were there any other models to fit the data? Yes, Pasteur's model was the one which seemed to be correct. There really were not any compelling reasons for choosing one model over another. The only thing Pasteur had the support of the Paris commission. But since Pouchet dropped out, the commission had no other model to support. The main reason why Pasteur's model was adopted by the scientific community was because Pouchet didn't argue his side.
Identify the hypothesis (testable question) that the study was trying to answer and describe the methods of research used in each study.
2. Describe the advantages and disadvantages of quasi-experiments? What is the fundamental weakness of a quasi-experimental design? Why is it a weakness? Does its weakness always matter?
There are some theories that science cannot prove. Science explains all of the logical and natural things in life through observation and experimentation. Religion explains all of the spiritual and mystical things in life. Religion is the belief and worshipping of a supernatural force like God. Jane Goodall is an outlier in the science industry. She believes in God and is also a scientist. Most scientists are only agnostic or atheists. Scientists only have one viewpoint. They only think logically and try to prove the existence of things. Religious people believe in a higher power that created everything and control everything. Jane Goodall has the perfect philosophy. When science is the only “window” someone bases their life on, there are drawbacks because there are a lot of things science cannot explain, logically. When religion is the only “window” someone bases their life on, there are drawbacks because there are a lot of things religion cannot explain, spiritually. When a person bases their life on both science and religion, more mysteries are answered. When both science and religion is part of a person’s philosophy, there are no drawbacks because they either support each other’s claims, do not explain each other, or supports one but not the
... the unknown microorganism and the microorganism did not react as well as it should have and lipid was not broken down in the process. (LAB BOOK)
Messenger, E., Gooch, J., & Seyler, D. U. (2011). Arguing About Science. Argument! (pp. 396-398). New York, NY: Mcgraw-Hill Co..
...s strength in the experiment rather than a limitation which future studies should also monitor.
Often, therapies that are pseudoscience will appear to be scientifically based when in fact they are not. In their article, “Science and Pseudoscience in Communication Disorder: Criteria and Applications,” Fin, Bothe and Bramlett (2005) assert there are 10 criteria that can assist in determining if a therapy is scientifically based or if it is pseudoscience (p. 172).
Daly and Wilson also refer to the research done by a British geneticist named A.J. Bateman to strengthen their arguments for the idea of status competition. Bateman's research focused on lab experiments done on Drosophila or fruit flies. The experiments consisted of taking fruit flies with "distinct genetic markers" and placing them in jars. It was made sure that each jar contained an equal number o...
Now during his time of teaching and being a part of administration at these different schools, he was also researching and performing studies in his labs. These breakthroughs are what Pasteur tends to be remembered for. One of his most well-known works is his work on the Germ Theory of Fermentation. Around this time many people believed in spontaneous generation. Spontaneous generation states that living organisms would develop from nonliving matter. Pasteur disproved this using boiled broths. He placed them in tubes with longs necks that did not allow particles to get in. No bacteria formed when the tube had the long filter on it. When he used regular tubes, the bacteria would form, thus proving that the origins of bacteria were caused by spores or dust particles and not by the broth itself. This began the theory of biogenesis which then caused spontaneous generations to be forgotten and disregarded. From here, Pasteur 's research showed that beers, milks, and other beverages would be spoiled due to the growth of these micro-organisms. He then invented a process of heating up the liquids in order to kill them and disinfect the liquids. This process is known as Pasteurization. He also hypothesized that micro-organisms caused human and animal diseases and could be prevented by not letting them into the body. Because of this, Joseph Lister inventing antiseptics to use in surgery, which helped to prevent diseases
“The views of people with strong opinions should be given equal prominence to those with compelling scientific evidence”. Discuss with reference to media coverage of a scientific controversy.
Many other experiments like this were performed, this experiment was also not the only experiment
A remarkable breakthrough in medicine occurred in the late 1800s through the work of Louis Pasteur. Pasteur's experiments showed that bacteria reproduce like other living things and travel from place to place. Using the results of his findings, he developed pasteurization, which is the process of heating liquids to kill bacteria and prevent fermentation. He also produced an anthrax vaccine as well as a way to weaken the rabies virus. After studying Pasteur's work, Joseph Lister developed antisepsis, which is the process of killing disease-causing germs.
1. Describe the Heidi and Howard experiment. What does it show about gender? Why is it significant?
To be able to demarcate science from non-science is immensely important, for our society, and its individuals. Science is our main source of knowledge and as such has many applications in our daily lives, and we need to be able to distinguish scientific findings and information from the many ideas and unbacked theories which are presented to large parts of the population, appearing as if they are fact. This may include something as fickle as weight loss plans that use diction not easily understood by the public to make the product appear authorized, certified and scientifically sound, when really the product is not scientifically tested, or trials not done in a credible manner. Another, possibly more serious scenario is in education, particularly science, many supporters of creationism and other pseudo sciences incorporate these teachings in schools, teaching them as if they were approved scientific theories to impressionable children, some who grow up retaining those beliefs, they were wrongfully taught, as fact.
In the history of science vs. religion there have been no issues more intensely debated than evolution vs. creationism. The issue is passionately debated since the majority of evidence is in favor of evolution, but the creation point of view can never be proved wrong because of religious belief. Human creation breaks down into three simple beliefs; creation theory, naturalistic evolution theory, and theistic evolution theory. The complexities of all three sides create a dilemma for what theory to support among all people, religious and non-religious.