I don't think many understand the scientific method and the progression from hypothesis to
theory to law.
The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic.
A law describes a single action, whereas a theory explains an entire group of related phenomena. It is
important to note that while theories can be tweaked, they are seldom, if ever, entirely replaced.
To better understand the differences let's look at the analogy made using a slingshot and an
A scientific law is like a slingshot. A slingshot has but one moving part--the rubber band. If you put a
rock in it and draw it back, the rock will fly out at a predictable speed, depending upon the distance the
band is drawn back.
An automobile has many moving parts, all working in unison to perform the chore of transporting
someone from one point to another point. An automobile is a complex piece of machinery. Sometimes,
improvements are made to one or more component parts. A new set of spark plugs that are composed
of a better alloy that can withstand heat better, for example, might replace the existing set. But the
function of the automobile as a whole remains unchanged.
MDDad wrote:Ford, I have no idea what you were trying to say in that last post.
kramer wrote:That's what I do here, I want people to question climate 'science'
kramer wrote:That's BS. You feel threatened because another science field isn't so stellar in its work...?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest