Science how does it work

Correction: Science is both a body of knowledge and the process for building that knowledge. Read more about it. Learn more about science as an ongoing process. Check out Science magazine's list of the most intriguing unanswered questions for a glimpse into ideas that scientists are studying right now.

If a hypothesis is not refutable or falsifiable , it does not meet the minimum requirements of the scientific method. For example, a hypothesis that God created the earth cannot be refuted, and therefore it cannot be evaluated using the scientific method. Many people who object to biotech crops argue that the crops should not be allowed to grow in the environment until science proves that they are safe.

Hypotheses and theories can never be proven true using the scientific method. Therefore, science advances only through disproof. This is a critical and often misunderstood point. To be scientific, theories can never be proven true, but all theories must be refutable. Therefore, all theories, and by extension all of science, are tentative.

Hypotheses about the existence of electrons have been supported after countless tests using the scientific method. In other words, they have not been refuted. Knowledge of the precise nature of electrons will always be undergoing refinement, but the weight of scientific evidence clearly supports the existence of electrons.

Scientific Proof and the Debate Between Evolution and Creationism Understanding how science works also is critical to understanding the seemingly never-ending debate between those who support evolution and those who support creationism. The debate typically devolves no pun intended! Hypotheses regarding numerous aspects of evolution have been posed and tested. As testing has winnowed out incorrect ones, our understanding has become ever more clear.

As with electrons, knowledge of the precise nature of evolution will undergo constant refinement, but the total current weight of scientific evidence supports the existence of evolution. In fact, anyone who supports evolution because of faith or belief is not using scientific rationality. Several arguments posed by creationists do constitute hypotheses and therefore are falsifiable. The hypothesis that the Earth is no more than 10, years old has been proposed numerous times, but refuted in many ways.

Conversely, alternative hypotheses that the Earth is much older have been repeatedly supported. Indeed, today the weight of evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the Earth is billions of years old. Unfortunately, many other arguments posed by creationists are not falsifiable and therefore cannot be addressed using scientific inquiry. How can we falsify the hypothesis that God or an Intelligent Designer created the major forms of life on Earth?

Creationist theories that cannot be refuted represent a particular world view, but they are not science. These theories can be taught in schools as philosophy or religion, but they must not be taught as science, unless the instructor uses them to demonstrate to the class what is and what is not science.

How about another example? Scientific investigations often involve repeating the same steps many times to account for new information and ideas. The simplified, linear scientific method implies that science is done by individual scientists working through these steps in isolation. But in reality , science depends on interactions within the scientific community.

Different parts of the process of science may be carried out by different people at different times. The simplified, linear scientific method implies that science has little room for creativity. But in reality , the process of science is exciting, dynamic, and unpredictable.

Science relies on creative people thinking outside the box! The simplified, linear scientific method implies that science concludes. But in reality , scientific conclusions are always revisable if warranted by the evidence.