Has science ever been proven to be wrong?

Question

I.e. is there anything in the past which was scientifically proven to be correct, which was subsequently found to have been incorrect?

Answer 1

Science doesn't deal in proof. Science observes and experiments and proposes hypotheses to explain the observations. If the hypothesis explains all the observations and is able to predict what should be observed then it gains the status of a theory but a theory is as good as it gets in science.

Theories are open and subject to change should further observations or experiments show them to be wrong. A classic example is the theory of gravity proposed by Isaac Newton about 400 years ago. Newtonian gravity is fine, it explains many things and it can be used to send spacecraft to the outer reaches of the solar system, slingshotting round the planets - but it is wrong. Einstein showed that Newtonian gravity doesn't work at the quantum level and special relativity is needed there. You could use Einsteinian gravity for big things too but it is complicated and Newtonian gravity works well at that level so both systems are used even though Newtonian gravity is wrong. It may well be that Einsteinian gravity is wrong too and another theory will be needed - but that is the way science works.

Proof is for mathematicians and logicians, not scientists. Science is open to new ideas not closed off with absolutes.

Answer 2

Yes, many times. As a simple example, look at the theory that the sun rotates around the earth. It made sense. It was supported by the evidence as initially understood. But as we grew to learn more, we came to discover that we were wrong on that one.

The theory of retrograde planet motion is another I can think of. Again, observational evidence indicated it to be true, but ultimately more advanced knowledge proved it wrong.

At any point in time, we can only describe -- and, indeed, question -- what we observe from within the framework of what we already know. How can we ask questions outside that framework? But every once in a while, we discover something new that changes our whole perspective and often disproves that which we once firmly believed was true.

Answer 3

Not by the definition you give.

Since nothing is or ever has been "proven scientifically to be correct", nothing would qualify (by your definition) as proving science "wrong."

But that said, of course many things that were once considered true by scientists was later shown to be incorrect ... or at least, in need of major revision ... but in every single case, this was shown *BY OTHER SCIENTISTS*. That is precisely what makes science such a powerful path to Truth ... it is *constantly* revising itself, questioning its assumptions, dumping archaic outdated ways of thinking.

Some examples:

* The idea by Aristotle and Ptolemy that the earth is the center of the universe was shown to be false *BY OTHER SCIENTISTS* like Copernicus and Galileo, who showed that the motion of the planets and their moons, or the phases of venus, were all much more easily explained if the sun was at the center of the solar system.

* The idea held by Newton that light was made up of particles (corpuscles) was shown *BY OTHER SCIENTISTS* like Huygens and later Einstein to be incorrect ... by showing that light has properties of waves.

* The Steady State concept of the universe held by scientists like Einstein and Hoyle was shown *BY OTHER SCIENTISTS* like Hubble, Friedman, and Lemaitre (who was both a Catholic priest and an excellent scientist) to be incorrect ... by showing that the universe is explanding, and that there is cosmic background radiation, and thus that the Big Bang provides a much better explanation of the structure of the universe.

Just showing up on Yahoo Answers and calling something "a joke" doesn't cut it. If a scientific concept is disproved ... it has to be disproved using science, and replaced by *better* scientific concepts. So it will need to be disproved *BY OTHER SCIENTISTS* ... not some Bible-thumping preacher whose only PhD is in religious education ... or by some bozo whose only science qualifications are the ability to post on a web site.

Answer 4

At which consider human historic past did technology exist without faith? If we flow again as far as historic Egypt, they'd a technology of organising (pyramids and so on), notwithstanding it changed into contained in the service of an already prevalent faith. Arguably, the atheist / communist international places of the 20 th. century had a technique of technology without faith, yet that changed into purely through authorities fiat, no longer a real separation. And the "faith" that technology proves incorrect, for instance, the Ptolemaic device of astronomy that talked about as the earth the middle of the universe, changed into, first, a technology that changed into followed through religion. technology is proving that the earth wasn't created in 7 days as all of us recognize the time period "day", yet that declare is held through purely the most ignorant knee-jerk believers. maximum Christians do no longer purchase the literal creationism. i imagine if the historic historic list were examined, shall we locate faith did basically tremendous lengthy before technology turned right into a gleam in some truth seeker's eye.

Answer 5

Yes,
Aristotle thought that the Earth was the center of the universe and that the sun, and other planets revolved around it.

Also, Pluto is no longer a planet.

Answer 6

For one is carbon dating, about 15 years ago they determined that they were calculating the age of things incorrectly.

Answer 7

science can not be proved to be wrong
as proving it self is a science

Answer 8

Yes.
That big bang theory is a joke!