Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This is a joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the United Kingdom's Royal Society, warning that scientific evidence about the origins of life was being "concealed, denied, or confused". It urges parents and teachers to provide children with the facts about the origins and evolution of life on Earth.
It is the violation of scientific integrity: violation of the scientific method and of research ethics in science, including in the design, conduct, and reporting of research. A Lancet review on Handling of Scientific Misconduct in Scandinavian countries provides the following sample definitions, [ 1 ] reproduced in The COPE report 1999: [ 2 ]
The overwhelming evidence at trial established that ID is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory. Throughout the trial and in various submissions to the Court, Defendants vigorously argue that the reading of the statement is not 'teaching' ID but instead is merely 'making students aware of it.'
For example, a government may decide to limit or restrict the widespread release of a medicine or new technology until it has been thoroughly tested. The principle acknowledges that while the progress of science and technology has often brought great benefit to humanity, it has also contributed to the creation of new threats and risks.
Scientific evidence is evidence that serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis, [1] although scientists also use evidence in other ways, such as when applying theories to practical problems. [2] Such evidence is expected to be empirical evidence and interpretable in accordance with the scientific method.
For example, anecdotal evidence from a friend about how to treat a certain disease constitutes empirical evidence that this treatment works but would not be considered scientific evidence. [ 38 ] [ 39 ] Others have argued that the traditional empiricist definition of empirical evidence as perceptual evidence is too narrow for much of scientific ...
"All methodologies, even the most obvious ones, have their limits." ―Paul Feyerabend in Against Method Philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend advanced the idea of epistemological anarchism, which holds that there are no useful and exception-free methodological rules governing the progress of science or the growth of knowledge, and that the idea that science can or should operate according to ...
The intelligent design movement states that there is a debate among scientists about whether life evolved. The movement stresses the importance of recognizing the existence of this supposed debate, seeking to convince the public, politicians, and cultural leaders that schools should "Teach the Controversy". [1]