What is the Scientific Method? Part 1

I don't answer my own question here. I ask you to give your own definition. I then challenge you to give an example of the scientific method at work, as well as to explain how the scientific method resulted in the theory of evolution, or some other similar major shift in thinking. Bonus question: When Edison tried 10,000 different materials as elements for the light bulb, was he using the scientific method?

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• Scientific
• method

[ctbuff34]

I have watched your video and seen the responses and I am amazed that no one actually responds to what you clearly ask for in the video, (myself included for that matter!) you are absolutely right that people on you tube are more interested in what they think you are trying to say than what you actually do

[DarwinsHamster]

This has not only happened in the context of this discussion. When I made videos asking questions about Israel, for instance, I got mean responses from people, many of whom assumed the opposite conclusions!

[ctbuff34]

well, I have looked specifically at the scientific method from the point of view of someone who is not a scientist, however, it seems that for the purposes of evolution we have accepted that the replication and testing part of the scientific method has been replaced by observations becoming evidence that doesn't contradict the theory thereby making it fact. am I getting this correct?

[DarwinsHamster]

That's an interesting question, and if I think I can add something to that discussion, I will make a video about it, but I'm going to have to think about it for a bit. Thanks for commenting.

[vanzant004]

How does Science the ablolute law and tool change. It doesn't.

Science is awsome.

So get it right!

Science is not quite what you said or even think but the thing you see in the old movies where the hero is busy working on a chalkboard and trying to finish his theory or tweak his weapon or solve the equation so he can tell the others what to do to save the world.

Sciencewas a tool that worked, AKA the egyptian square.

You ever do that thing, 'POST' {finish} and you too can do it.

Try it!

[DarwinsHamster]

"Science is not quite what you said or even think." I didn't say what I thought it was at all, I was merely asking what people thought. several more videos are in the series. You have jumped to conclusions merely from the asking of questions, which happens far too often in YouTube.

[stringtheory9991]

@mastersausagemaker You can see evolution well in the domestication of fruits and animals. EX: Wolf to Dog

I'm assuming you agree a wolf is not a dog.

[stringtheory9991]

1. (240BCE {Hypothesis}) Eratosthenes sees objects traveling over horizon. Concludes round earth.2. (Collecting data) Eratosthenes sends partner south with a pole. Both of them measure the length of the shadow that the pole casts. If Earth is flat the pole's will cast the same length shadow. Earth is round shadow length will vary.3. {Confirming data}The two shadows are different lengths.The earth is round is NOW a THEORY. 4. (April 12, 1961) Man enters space and can see earth is round.CONFIRMED

[neoverse]

@mastersausagemaker Assume what ever you like, this is the basis of "Evo" & "BB" anyway, I would expect nothing less from someone who believes those things.

[neoverse]

My comment stand, repeating opinions and theories doesn't equal fact. Viruses and bacteria adapt, this is their functioin in life. it has nothing to do with evolution.

How about showing some real evidence like a bacteria changing to a non bacterial life form. Anything short of that is irrelevant.

Bacteria will always be bacteria.

Humans will always and have always been humans as they are today.

[mastersausagemaker]

@neoverse

The bacterial evolution experiment does not demonstrate that intelligence is needed. The biologists are not physically changing the genome of the bacterium.

Rather, only the impetus for change is provided and the scientists passively observe what changes occur.

From your statements, I would assume that you have no formal introduction to experimental techniques and theory.

As for admitting that evolution and the big bang theories are theories: they are. Why would that be bad?

[mastersausagemaker]

@neoverse

As to your "theories" comment, this point supremely saddens me because either you are being disingenuous or you are ignorant to what the meaning of theory is having only spoken it in the vernacular. But no worries, that is only part of the jargon that you say that no one should be fooled by. Do you not realise what the implication of a theory means in scientific jargon? If you did you would realise that your argument stands moot.

[mastersausagemaker]

@neoverse

Adapting to changing environments IS evolution. As well, if the experiment was not under controlled conditions the results would be meaningless. As for intelligent beings, only the impetus is given; having the bacteria evolve to the stimuli is not controlled by the observers since their position is passive. Learning the technical jargon allows one to actually learn about the theory and what it means. As for the equations, what's wrong with math?

[neoverse]

Well, I hope no one falls for this bacterial evolution BS. These kind of experiments are done under controlled conditions by intelligent beings. It only shows that you need intelligence to do it. Adapting to an environment does not equal evolution, don't be fooled by all the technical jargon and equations. You have already admitted that "evo" and "BB" are theories and they should be treated as such. Stop lying to yourself.