The scientific method works well when it is used properly, but ignoring the rules, not looking at results in an objective manner, and flat-out cheating can lead to bad science. We must therefore be careful along every step of the scientific process, including the selection of which evidence to consider for a hypothesis. Consider the following scenario: A person sees a UFO in the middle of the night while walking alone on the beach. No other evidence of the UFO is left behind at the scene. Would the anecdotal verbal account from this witness be valid scientific evidence of the event?

Question

Weston Grant

Social Studies

12 January, 18:43

The scientific method works well when it is used properly, but ignoring the rules, not looking at results in an objective manner, and flat-out cheating can lead to bad science. We must therefore be careful along every step of the scientific process, including the selection of which evidence to consider for a hypothesis. Consider the following scenario: A person sees a UFO in the middle of the night while walking alone on the beach. No other evidence of the UFO is left behind at the scene. Would the anecdotal verbal account from this witness be valid scientific evidence of the event?

+5

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Ainsley Alvarado · Answer 1

No, because follow-up tests conducted by others cannot verify it.

Explanation:

Science relies so much on careful consideration of results and methods by which results are gotten. This means that a scientific result is as important as the method and its authentic source of origin.