Scientific Method: Difference between revisions
Flerf scientific method |
PeterMarkley (talk | contribs) Add category |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
4) Experiment (Vary & manipulate the presumed cause "IV", to vary & induce the effect "DV") Keeping everything else constant/controlled "CV". Systematic experimentation validates your Hypothesis (proving the alt or the null) | 4) Experiment (Vary & manipulate the presumed cause "IV", to vary & induce the effect "DV") Keeping everything else constant/controlled "CV". Systematic experimentation validates your Hypothesis (proving the alt or the null) | ||
5) Conclusion/Publish (which Hypothesis was proven "alt or null") either of them would be proof about the observed natural phenomena in step 1, and would be part of step 2 for the next researcher. | 5) Conclusion/Publish (which Hypothesis was proven "alt or null") either of them would be proof about the observed natural phenomena in step 1, and would be part of step 2 for the next researcher. | ||
[[Category:Flerf lies]] | |||
Revision as of 17:04, 8 March 2025
This flawed method created by a flerf nammed theviking:
Scientific Method: 1) Observe Natural Phenomenon (occurring naturally in nature) see something in nature without man creating or causing it. 2) Background research & ask questions (see if anyone else has done the same experiment & explore possible reasons for the phenomena to occur) why, how, such happens. 3) Develop Hypothesis (If cause A "IV", then effect B "DV") Alt Hypothesis (if A, then B) & the contrapositive Null Hypothesis (if A, then not B). 4) Experiment (Vary & manipulate the presumed cause "IV", to vary & induce the effect "DV") Keeping everything else constant/controlled "CV". Systematic experimentation validates your Hypothesis (proving the alt or the null) 5) Conclusion/Publish (which Hypothesis was proven "alt or null") either of them would be proof about the observed natural phenomena in step 1, and would be part of step 2 for the next researcher.