The Scientific Method begins with observations. Hmm, where did those flies come from on that piece of meat in that closed jar? The scientist observes and notices things going on around him or her. The observations raise questions that try to understand or explain what is going on. Which may lead to additional observations and questions. Next, a hypothesis is formed. This is a tentative answer to the question: a testable explanation for what was observed. The scientist tries to explain what caused what was observed. Next, the scientist uses deductive reasoning to test the hypothesis. This is done by making a prediction and then setting up a controlled experiment to test the prediction. A theory is a generalization based on many observations and experiments; a well-tested, verified hypothesis that fits existing data and explains how processes or events are thought to occur. It is a basis for predicting future events or discoveries. Theories may be modified as new information is gained. This definition of a theory is in sharp contrast to colloquial usage, where people say something is "just a theory," thereby intending to imply a great deal of uncertainty.
Scientists in many fields observe changes that interest them. From frogs disappearing, to lakes acidifying, to changes in concentrations of atmospheric gases, etc. The scientific method uses two kinds of logical reasoning: deductive and inductive: Deduction: In the process of deduction, you begin with some statements, called 'premises', that are assumed to be true, you then determine what else would have to be true if the premises are true. For example, you can begin by assuming that God exists, and is good, and then determine what would logically follow from such an assumption. You can begin by assuming that if you think, then you must exist, and work from there. In mathematics you can begin with some axioms and then determine what you can prove to be true given those axioms. With deduction you can provide absolute proof of your conclusions, given that your premises are correct. The premises themselves, however, remain unproven and unprovable, they must be accepted on face value, or by faith, or for the purpose of exploration. Induction: In the process of induction, you begin with some data, and then determine what general conclusion(s) can logically be derived from those data. In other words, you determine what theory or theories could explain the data. For example, you note that the probability of becoming schizophrenic is greatly increased if at least one parent is schizophrenic, and from that you conclude that schizophrenia may be inherited. That is certainly a reasonable hypothesis given the data. Note, however, that induction does not prove that the theory is correct. There are often alternative theories that are also supported by the data. For example, the behavior of the schizophrenic parent may cause the child to be schizophrenic, not the genes. What is important in induction is that the theory does indeed offer a logical explanation of the data. To conclude that the parents have no effect on the schizophrenia of the children is not supportable given the data, and would not be a logical conclusion. (Taken from Intro to Logical Reasoning) When dealing with multiple dynamic global systems such as our atmosphere interacting with the other dynamic processes on our planet, inductive reasoning based on empirical evidence plays a more significant role in considering the validity of a hypothesis. Just because you can't achieve absolute certainty does not negate the high probability of the correctness of the hypothesis based on the scientific evidence to date. The consensus of the majority of scientists find that the evidence supports the hypothesis of climate change that is primarily being driven by rising CO2 levels with a high probability that the primary contributor to this rise is the human. That's the science. To say the hypothesis hasn't been proven is correct but doesn't really say anything new. Everyone would agrees with that statement. And given that statement, it still holds that the preponderance of scientific research and evidence supports the theory. The ongoing scientific inquiry seeks to further understand the observable changes with the purpose of understanding the potential impact on the planet and precautionary steps we might want to take that would benefit us and other life systems many of us are also concerned about. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org Send email to [email protected] Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
