In which situation would a scientific theory be rejected?

A scientific theory may be rejected in several situations, including:

1. **Contradictory Evidence**: If new data or observations consistently contradict the predictions made by the theory, it may lead to its rejection. This includes instances where experimental results do not align with the theoretical framework.

2. **Inconsistency with Established Facts**: If a theory conflicts with well-established scientific facts or other theories that have been extensively verified, it may not be considered valid.

3. **Failure to Make Testable Predictions**: A theory must be able to generate testable predictions. If it becomes impossible to derive predictions that can be experimentally verified, the theory may be considered inadequate.

4. **The Theory's Scope**: If a theory cannot adequately explain a broad range of phenomena within its scope, or if it fails to address certain key aspects of the subject matter, it may be deemed insufficient.

5. **Simpler Explanations**: According to Occam's Razor, if a simpler theory can explain the same phenomena equally well, scientists may prefer the simpler explanation and thus reject the more complex theory.

6. **Advancements in Technology or Methodology**: New technologies or methodologies can provide better insights or more accurate data that refute an existing theory. If new methods reveal flaws in the theory, it may lead to its rejection.

7. **Reproducibility and Peer Review**: Scientific findings must be reproducible. If a theory is based on results that cannot be consistently replicated by independent researchers, it may lose credibility and ultimately be rejected.

In science, theories can evolve and be refined rather than outright rejected; however, persistent issues in any of the above areas can lead to significant revisions or a complete overhaul of a scientific theory.