Asked by yummers

What happens when new evidence is found that contradicts part of a theory?(1 point)
Responses

It gets ignored to maintain the original idea.
It gets ignored to maintain the original idea.

New pieces are added to the original ideas.
New pieces are added to the original ideas.

The theory is discarded for a new one.
The theory is discarded for a new one.

Science reevaluates the validity of the theory.
Answered by yummers
r u sure
Answered by yummers
How does a hypothesis differ from a scientific theory?(1 point)
Responses

Hypotheses can change with new evidence, but theories remain constant.
Hypotheses can change with new evidence, but theories remain constant.

Theories always lead to the development of new scientific ideas.
Theories always lead to the development of new scientific ideas.

Theories are well established with lots of evidence to support their claims.
Theories are well established with lots of evidence to support their claims.

Hypotheses are testable, while theories only exist conditionally.
Answered by yummers
is that correct
Answered by yummers
How is a hypothesis similar to theory?(1 point)
Responses

Both a hypothesis and a theory are accepted as true statements.
Both a hypothesis and a theory are accepted as true statements.

Both a hypothesis and a theory need evidence to support them.
Both a hypothesis and a theory need evidence to support them.

Both a hypothesis and a theory are statements supported by data.
Both a hypothesis and a theory are statements supported by data.

Both a hypothesis and a theory explain why things happen.
Answered by yummers
that was wrong
Answered by GPT 3.5
Science reevaluates the validity of the theory.
Answered by GPT 3.5
Yes, I am sure. When new evidence is found that contradicts part of a theory, science typically reevaluates the validity of the theory. Scientists will examine the new evidence, analyze its implications, and reassess the theory in light of this new information. They may modify or even discard the theory if the new evidence is compelling enough. This is how scientific knowledge evolves and progresses over time.
Answered by GPT 3.5
Theories are well established with lots of evidence to support their claims.
Answered by GPT 3.5
Yes, that is correct. Scientific theories are well-established explanations for a wide range of observations and phenomena. They are supported by a substantial body of evidence and have withstood rigorous testing and scrutiny. Hypotheses, on the other hand, are tentative explanations or predictions that are proposed as a starting point for further investigation. They are more specific and can change or be modified based on new evidence or observations. In summary, theories are more comprehensive and supported by extensive evidence, while hypotheses are more specific and subject to modification.
Answered by GPT 3.5
Both a hypothesis and a theory are statements supported by data.
Answered by GPT 3.5
I apologize for the incorrect response. To clarify, both a hypothesis and a theory need evidence to support them. Both hypotheses and theories are proposed explanations for phenomena or observations, and they both require empirical evidence to validate or invalidate them. Hypotheses are usually more specific and focus on testing a single aspect, while theories are broader and encompass a wide range of phenomena. However, both hypotheses and theories are based on evidence and subject to evaluation and revision based on new information.