Explanations relate variable observations to an underlying structure to predict future events

Overview Debates Related claims Topics

The Stockholm University and University of Hong Kong study on Chinese students analyzed outcomes across nine subjects using closed-book exams, entrance exams, and homework data

Nature serves as the ultimate gold standard against which scientific theories are judged

Science is built on its own fallibility and is the only discipline that acknowledges it

A problem-first approach in science requires flexibility in choosing solutions, whether they involve modeling, data collection, or other methods

An intervention with a sound biological mechanism can still prove ineffective for treating a human disease

A biological pathway that is critical in a petri dish may represent only a minor part of a complex human disease

A mechanistically plausible intervention may fail if the compound does not reach the target tissue in sufficient concentration

Creating new knowledge requires testing ideas against reality through physical experiments

Theoretical thinking alone cannot predict all possible expected and unexpected experimental outcomes

A negative result can also be the unexpected identification of a new, previously unknown structure

A string of negative results followed by a positive result provides valuable data on process engineering

A null result in materials science can be when an intended structure is not produced

There is concern among analysts that "response bias" is affecting polls, as enthusiastic Democrats are more likely to participate

The principle 'absence of evidence is not equal to evidence of absence' suggests a lack of scientific proof does not mean something is false

Sonia Lyubomirsky stated that she now views scientific, anecdotal, and clinical knowledge as equally valid sources of wisdom

The impact of individuals on history is difficult to determine because there is only one historical record to observe

The remote viewing test for consciousness can produce false negatives but not false positives.

Rigorous scientific studies on food additives are expensive and difficult to run, requiring thousands of subjects.

Nutrition research on humans is difficult because subjects cannot be confined for long-term, controlled dietary experiments.

Studying food additives is scientifically complex because people consume many different foods with various additives.