what does a scientist mean by conclucive evidence???

Answer 1

"A fact is said to be conclusive evidence for a proposition if it is logically impossible for the fact to be true while the proposition is false. For any piece of historical evidence, alternative explanations are always possible. Most alternatives might not have much credibility, but as long as they are not impossible, the evidence is not conclusive."

Answer 2

Unfortunately, the exact definition will depend much on the field of science, the scientists involved, and the question that has been raised. The most basic definition would be something like "evidence that more than 99% believe provides a single answer to the question presented"

For example, you will never get conclusive evidence that "it is a warm day". But, a statement that at this moment in time and this place, this thermometer says 85F +/-1F would be conclusive evidence that the temperature is 85F.

Answer 3

This means the evidence leads to a conclusion, the scientist's conclusion. For example, I might say:

I have conclusive evidence that each bottle of Coke contains 20oz.

What might this conclusive evidence be? Perhaps I went and measured the volume of 100 bottles of Coke and through some number crunching found that I could be reasonably confident that each bottle of Coke contains approximately 20oz.

Does this necessarily mean that EVERY bottle of coke contains 20oz? No. But all evidence seems to indicate that this is so.

When a scientist says 'I have conclusive evidence that...', they are saying that they are reasonably certain, based on their observations and number crunching, that they have arrived at the proper conclusion. That the evidence they have found leads to the conclusion they have drawn. I don't think it necessarily means they would say with 100% certainty that their conclusion must be 100% correct.

One scientist says 'I have conclusive evidence that it is healthy to have 3 servings of dairy every day.' Another scientist may say 'I have conclusive evidence that it is unhealthly to have more than 2 servings of dairy every day.' These are obviously contradictory. So saying you have conclusive evidence doesn't mean you are without a doubt correct. Because someone else measuring a different set of variables may have conclusive evidence to the contrary. Though my example may be inaccurate, this 'dairy debate' is ongoing. Scientists disagree on the health benefits of dairy, though each would claim to have conclusive evidence supporting their claims.

I think I am probably over-explaining. Sorry.

I hope this helps.

Answer 4

He is convinced.

Scientists are allowed to change their minds about what conclusions a piece of evidence suggests. This is how discoveries are made. If it was different, scientists would still be trying to prove that a new Ice age was upon us.

Answer 5

He means that there is sufficient evidence, given what we understand today about a certain subject, that would allow him or her to conclude without contradiction a hypothesis or theory is true.

The key there is that "what we know" about certain subjects changes all the time.

So what is conclusive evidence today is faulty science tomorrow.

.

Answer 6

If you are asking if he(she) has conclusive evidence than that they are DEFINITE about the findings of their information.
Example: Dr. Macy has found conclusive evidence that the defendant was guilty of the crime in question.

Answer 7

It is the final piece of evidence that proves a hypothesis to be fact.

Answer 8

Evidence that prooves something well enough to conclude a hypothetical question.

Answer 9

the evidence brings only one conclusion.

Answer 10

evidence that proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that something IS.