What would happen if correct new evidence was discovered that did not agree with a well established scientific theory?
a) the theory would be modified or replaced
b) the evidence would be false. evidence has to match the theory.
c) this couldn't happen. the theory is correct
A
Right.
d) the new evidence would be repeated, and validated, then the theory would have to be modified or replaced.
THANKS MS SUE AND BOBPURSLEY :)
The most likely answer to your question is a) the theory would be modified or replaced. In the scientific method, theories are based on existing evidence and explanations for observed phenomena. However, science is always open to new evidence and discoveries. If correct new evidence emerges that contradicts a well-established scientific theory, it would prompt scientists to reassess and reevaluate the theory.
Scientists would carefully examine the new evidence and compare it with the existing theory. If the evidence is valid and the observations can be replicated consistently, it would challenge the established theory. In such a situation, scientists would strive to modify or update the theory to incorporate the new evidence or, in extreme cases, replace it altogether with a new theory that better explains the observations.
This process reflects the dynamic and self-correcting nature of science. Scientific theories are not dogma but rather our best understanding of the natural world based on the available evidence. They are always subject to scrutiny, revision, and improvement as new discoveries and evidence emerge. This is one of the strengths of the scientific method and how scientific knowledge evolves over time.